Fort Stewart court martial lawyer – 6th Amendment Right to counsel

April 20, 2010

Fort Stewart court martial lawyer – 6th Amendment Right to counsel In United States v. Wiechmann, 67 M.J. 456 (2009), the issue was whether SM was denied his 6th Amendment Right to counsel when the SJA did not accept one of the two detailed defense counsel. The court concluded that even though the convening authority [...]

Read the full article →

San Diego Court Martial Attorney Writing used to refresh memory

April 19, 2010

Writing used to refresh memory San Diego Court Martial Attorney If the witness uses a writing to refresh his or her memory for the purpose of testifying, either (1) when testifying, or (2) prior to testifying, when the military judge holds it is needed in the interests of justice, an adverse party is entitled to [...]

Read the full article →

Scope of examination Yongsan Court Martial Attorney

April 18, 2010

Scope of examination – Yongsan Court Martial Attorney Cross-examination should be restricted to the subject matter of the direct examination and matters affecting the credibility of the witness. The military judge can, in the exercise of discretion, permit inquiry about additional matters like on direct examination.In United States v. Stavely, 33 M.J. 92 (1992) the [...]

Read the full article →

Sex assault court martial lawyer – Impeachment with Prior Statements

April 17, 2010

Sex assault court martial lawyer – Impeachment with Prior Statements Evidence that on a prior occasion a witness made a statement inconsistent with his or her present testimony is perhaps the most effective and most frequently employed attack on witness credibility. Saying one thing on the stand and something different earlier creates a doubt as [...]

Read the full article →

Military Lawyer Criminal Defense Attorney MRE 613

April 17, 2010

Military Lawyer Criminal Defense Attorney MRE 613 Prior statements of witnesses In examining the witness concerning a prior statement made by the witness, whether written or not, the statement may not be shown nor its contents disclosed to him at that time, but upon request the same must be shown or disclosed to opposing counsel. [...]

Read the full article →