|
Yes, we have noticed Mellette is out and will have a comment by Monday. Word is that there are now several ongoing cases where the defense is asking the MJ to reconsider Mil. R. Evid. 513 rulings in light of Mellette. The trailer-park expands.
No. 22-0165/AF. U.S. v. Jonathan M. Martinez. CCA 39973. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is granted on the following issue: WHETHER, BY DENYING APPELLANT'S MOTION TO INSTRUCT THE PANEL THAT A GUILTY VERDICT REQUIRED UNANIMITY, THE MILITARY JUDGE VIOLATED APPELLANT'S FIFTH OR SIXTH AMENDMENT RIGHTS. No. 22-0196/NA. U.S. v. Isiah Anthony P. Causey. CCA 202000228. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is granted on the following issue: DO MILITARY DEFENDANTS HAVE A RIGHT TO UNANIMOUS VERDICTS FOR SERIOUS OFFENSES TRIED AT COURTS-MARTIAL, IN LIGHT OF RAMOS v. LOUISIANA, 140 S. CT. 1390 (2020)? Comments are closed.
|
Disclaimer: Posts are the authors' personal opinions and do not reflect the position of any organization or government agency.
Co-editors:
Phil Cave Brenner Fissell Links
UCMJ CAAF -Daily Journal -Current Term Opinions ACCA AFCCA CGCCA NMCCA Joint R. App. Pro. UMCJ History Global Reform Army Lawyer JAG Reporter Army Crim. L. Deskbook CAAFlog 1.0 CAAFlog 2.0 Archives
September 2023
Categories
All
|
RSS Feed