Brief filed: 07/30/2010
Smith v. United States
United States Supreme Court; Case No. 10-18
Decision below, 68 M.J. 445 (C.A.A.F. 2010).
There is a conflict in the federal circuits as to whether a trial court’s restriction of a defendant’s ability to cross-examine his accuser is to be reviewed de novo on appeal or for abuse of discretion; the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces reviews a military judge's decision to admit or exclude evidence for an abuse of discretion. The Court should resolve this conflict because it implicates an issue of fundamental importance, the scope of a defendant’s constitutional right to confront his accusers.
Pattern Cross-Examination of Expert Witnesses: A Trial Strategy & Resource Guide
In a criminal trial, cross-examination of the prosecution’s forensic expert may make the difference between victory or defeat.
2020 Sample Motions Collection Update
NACDL’s 2020 Sample Motions Collection is the follow-up to our wildly popular 2019 Sample Motions Collection and contains the newest and most recent additions to our ever-expanding Sample Motions library.
State v. Stone - A Case Study on Child Sexual Molestation & Sexual Battery
The criminal defense attorney tasked with defending such a case has to be prepared to not only show reasonable doubt, but to answer this question: If it did not happen, how is it that the child believes it did happen?
POZNER ON CROSS: Advanced Cross of Experts & Officers in DUI Cases
It’s not your strong opening argument. It’s not how many of your impassioned objections the judge sustains. It’s not even how you tie your theory of the case together with a dazzling closing statement bow. What wins your trial is your cross.
This is a sponsored ad
Manage Your Law Firm All in One Place
Jonathan L. Marcus, Gregory M. Lipper and Jennifer Reid Whitfield, Covington & Burling, Washington, DC.