Claim OwnershipCriminal Law Department Presents
Subscribed: 46Played: 204
Subscribe
© DVIDSHub.net
Description
This podcast is part of The Quill & Sword series of podcasts created and hosted by The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School (TJAGLCS). Produced by the TJAGLCS Criminal Law Department, the podcast offers a 10-20 minute discussion about every published CAAF opinion—"CAAF Chats"—as well as a curated assortment of selected topics related to military justice - "Military Justice Grab Bag." Two shows, one channel. Connect with The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School by visiting our website at https://tjaglcs.army.mil/ or on Facebook (tjaglcs), Instagram (tjaglcs), or LinkedIn (school/tjaglcs).
38 Episodes
Reverse
In this episode, we discuss CAAF's decision in United States v. Flores. This case examines sentence appropriateness review under the new sentencing procedures established by the Military Justice Act of 2016. Connect with The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School by visiting our website at https://tjaglcs.army.mil/ or on Facebook (tjaglcs), Instagram (tjaglcs), or LinkedIn (school/tjaglcs).
In this episode, we discuss CAAF's decision in United States v. Driskill. This case examines Double Jeopardy and its application to offenses charged under Article 134. Connect with The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School by visiting our website at https://tjaglcs.army.mil/ or on Facebook (tjaglcs), Instagram (tjaglcs), or LinkedIn (school/tjaglcs).
In this episode, we discuss CAAF's decision in United States v. Ramirez. Specifically, we examine when a military judge must allow questions concerning racial bias during voir dire - while discussing voir dire and bias generally. Connect with The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School by visiting our website at https://tjaglcs.army.mil/ or on Facebook (tjaglcs), Instagram (tjaglcs), or LinkedIn (school/tjaglcs).
In this episode, we discuss CAAF's decision in United States v. Warda. Here, the CAAF examines the remedy when the Government is unable to produce documents required by Rule for Courts-Martial 703. The Court provides rules for practitioners concerning their discovery obligations. Connect with The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School by visiting our website at https://tjaglcs.army.mil/ or on Facebook (tjaglcs), Instagram (tjaglcs), or LinkedIn (school/tjaglcs).
In this episode, we discuss CAAF's decision in United States v. Brown. Specifically, we examine CAAF's view of Part IV of the Manual for Courts-Marital and what constitutes "presence" for disrespect of a noncommissioned officer. Connect with The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School on Facebook (tjaglcs), LinkedIn (tjaglcs), or visit our website for more resources at https://tjaglcs.army.mil/leapp You can also connect directly with the Criminal Law Department on Facebook (tjaglcs_crimlaw) or Instagram (tjaglcs_crimlaw)
In this episode, we examine CAAF’s latest case concerning unlawful command influence. Specifically, we examine the difference between actual and apparent unlawful command influence, and the influence that judge advocates can have on the system. Connect with The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School on Facebook (tjaglcs), LinkedIn (tjaglcs), or visit our website for more resources at https://tjaglcs.army.mil/leapp You can also connect directly with the Criminal Law Department on Facebook (tjaglcs_crimlaw) or Instagram (tjaglcs_crimlaw)
In this episode, we examine CAAF’s analysis concerning when an accused makes a prima facie (pronounced pree-muh fah-shuh according to the majority of the criminal law department) showing that race played a role in the panel selection process at their court martial, whether that panel was properly constituted. The Court weighed their previous precedent which allowed a race conscious selection process for the purpose of inclusion in contrast with the Supreme Court’s ruling in US v Batson which said “race is an impermissible criterion for selection of jurors.” This case is very important for judge advocates to understand as they advise their commanders on selecting court martial members (jurors).
Connect with The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School on Facebook (tjaglcs), LinkedIn (tjaglcs), or visit our website for more resources at https://tjaglcs.army.mil/leapp
You can also connect directly with the Criminal Law Department on Facebook (tjaglcs_crimlaw) or Instagram (tjaglcs_crimlaw)
In this episode we examine CAAF's analysis concerning how and when a statement qualifies under the excited utterance exception to the hearsay rules and whether appellant's conviction is legally sufficient.
Connect with The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School on Facebook (tjaglcs), LinkedIn (tjaglcs), or visit our website for more resources at https://tjaglcs.army.mil/leapp
You can also connect directly with the Criminal Law Department on Facebook (tjaglcs_crimlaw) or Instagram (tjaglcs_crimlaw)
In this final part, we conclude our analysis of the CAAF's decision in United States v. Hasan. This episode addresses the SJA's role in providing Article 34 advice, ACCA's decision to not recuse itself, and MAJ Hasan's continued self representation during the post-trial phase. Connect with The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School on Facebook (tjaglcs), LinkedIn (tjaglcs), or visit our website for more resources at https://tjaglcs.army.mil/leapp You can also connect directly with the Criminal Law Department on Facebook (tjaglcs_crimlaw) or Instagram (tjaglcs_crimlaw)
In this second of a three parts, we continue our analysis of the CAAF's decision in United States v. Hasan. This episode addresses whether the military judge has a duty to excuse a panel member for cause and the constitutionality of Article 45(b) of the UCMJ.Connect with The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School on Facebook (tjaglcs), LinkedIn (tjaglcs), or visit our website for more resources at https://tjaglcs.army.mil/leapp You can also connect directly with the Criminal Law Department on Facebook (tjaglcs_crimlaw) or Instagram (tjaglcs_crimlaw)
In this first of a three parts, we examine the the CAAF's decision in United States v. Hasan. This episode addresses the history of this case, and explains the CAAF's opinion addressing MAJ Hasan's decision to represent himself and the Military Judge's decision to close a portion of the trial to the public. Connect with The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School on Facebook (tjaglcs), LinkedIn (tjaglcs), or visit our website for more resources at https://tjaglcs.army.mil/leapp You can also connect directly with the Criminal Law Department on Facebook (tjaglcs_crimlaw) or Instagram (tjaglcs_crimlaw)
These two cases examine the CAAF’s jurisdiction when deciding on writs filed by SVCs. Specifically, the CAAF decides whether they have the authority to review decisions made by the CCA’s when asked by an accused, and by an SVC, respectively.
Connect with The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School on Facebook (tjaglcs), LinkedIn (tjaglcs), or visit our website for more resources at https://tjaglcs.army.mil/leapp
You can also connect directly with the Criminal Law Department on Facebook (tjaglcs_crimlaw) or Instagram (tjaglcs_crimlaw)
In this case, CAAF considers whether courts-martial defendants have a right to a unanimous guilty verdict under the Sixth Amendment, the Fifth Amendment Due Process Clause, or the Fifth Amendment component of equal protection.
Connect with The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School on Facebook (tjaglcs), LinkedIn (tjaglcs), or visit our website for more resources at https://tjaglcs.army.mil/leapp
You can also connect directly with the Criminal Law Department on Facebook (tjaglcs_crimlaw) or Instagram (tjaglcs_crimlaw)
This case clarifies what “viewing” means for purposes of Article 120c, Indecent Viewing. Specifically, CAAF considers whether “viewing” includes viewing a simultaneously created visual image of the private area of another person.
Connect with The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School on Facebook (tjaglcs), LinkedIn (tjaglcs), or visit our website for more resources at https://tjaglcs.army.mil/leapp
You can also connect directly with the Criminal Law Department on Facebook (tjaglcs_crimlaw) or Instagram (tjaglcs_crimlaw)
CAAF explores the appellant’s claims that he suffered cruel and unusual punishment under Article 55, UCMJ and the 8th Amendment during a period of post-trial confinement in a civilian jail.
Connect with The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School on Facebook (tjaglcs), LinkedIn (tjaglcs), or visit our website for more resources at https://tjaglcs.army.mil/leapp
You can also connect directly with the Criminal Law Department on Facebook (tjaglcs_crimlaw) or Instagram (tjaglcs_crimlaw)
CAAF considers whether a military judge abused his discretion by failing to abide by the heightened plea inquiry where the charged offense implicated both criminal and constitutionally protected conduct.
Connect with The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School on Facebook (tjaglcs), LinkedIn (tjaglcs), or visit our website for more resources at https://tjaglcs.army.mil/leapp
You can also connect directly with the Criminal Law Department on Facebook (tjaglcs_crimlaw) or Instagram (tjaglcs_crimlaw)
Military Judge Colonel Robert (Rob) Shuck provides advice for military justice practitioners in the field for improving their legal practice.
Connect with The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School on Facebook (tjaglcs), LinkedIn (tjaglcs), or visit our website for more resources at https://tjaglcs.army.mil/leapp
You can also connect directly with the Criminal Law Department on Facebook (tjaglcs_crimlaw) or Instagram (tjaglcs_crimlaw)
Both these cases explore the reasonableness of the Government’s search of an Accused’s cellular phone. CAAF looks at both the reasonableness of the methodologies of these searches and whether the exclusionary rule should be applied to evidence found during the searches of the cellular phones in these cases.
Connect with The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School on Facebook (tjaglcs), LinkedIn (tjaglcs), or visit our website for more resources at https://tjaglcs.army.mil/leapp
You can also connect directly with the Criminal Law Department on Facebook (tjaglcs_crimlaw) or Instagram (tjaglcs_crimlaw)
In this case, CAAF consider an improper sentencing argument, specifically looking at and applying the test for prejudice from improper sentencing arguments. MAJ Dustin Morgan and LtCol David Segraves provide an overview of the case and key takeaways for military justice practitioners.
Connect with The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School on Facebook (tjaglcs), LinkedIn (tjaglcs), or visit our website for more resources at https://tjaglcs.army.mil/leapp
You can also connect directly with the Criminal Law Department on Facebook (tjaglcs_crimlaw) or Instagram (tjaglcs_crimlaw)
Colonel (Ret.) Larry Morris, the Chief of Staff/Counselor to the President of The Catholic University of America delivered the 50th Kenneth J. Hodson Lecture in Criminal Law to the 71st Graduate Course and the Staff and Faculty at The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School. He provided an historical and principled view on “Military Justice in Transition.”
This was a special moment to honor the incredible US Army JAG Corps legacy of Major General Kenneth J. Hodson, whose Army career spanned over 30 years, from 1942 through his appointment as The Judge Advocate General of the Army in 1967, to his retirement in 1971, and to celebrate this significant milestone at TJAGLCS.
Connect with The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School on Facebook (tjaglcs), LinkedIn (tjaglcs), or visit our website for more resources at https://tjaglcs.army.mil/leapp
You can also connect directly with the Criminal Law Department on Facebook (tjaglcs_crimlaw) or Instagram (tjaglcs_crimlaw)
Comments
Download from Google Play
Download from App Store
United States