|
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
SCOTUS CAAF -Daily Journal -2024 Ops ACCA AFCCA CGCCA NMCCA JRAP JRTP UCMJ Amendments to UCMJ Since 1950 (2024 ed.) Amendments to RCM Since 1984 (2024 ed.) Amendments to MRE Since 1984 (2024 ed.) MCM 2024 MCM 2023 MCM 2019 MCM 2016 MCM 2012 MCM 1995 UMCJ History Global Reform Army Lawyer JAG Reporter Army Crim. L. Deskbook J. App. Prac. & Pro. CAAFlog 1.0 CAAFlog 2.0 Archives
October 2024
Categories
All
|
RSS Feed