August 30, 2010 Comments Off
Deployments are the norm in today’s military. Depending on your specialty, location, and rank, you may find yourself in the Middle East every other year. At this same time, you may find that you never leave the continental United States. A massive bureaucracy, the military looks at its needs first. Compassion finishes a distant second.
Some folks weather the deployment storm with no problems. They compartmentalize the experience(s) and arrive back to their families with no mental issues, infirmities, or ailments. Aside from adjusting for climate and a renewed daily routine, they are substantially the same guy or gal. Others are not so lucky. Some lack the ability to compartmentalize. Others simply possess fragile mental abilities compared to others. Yet others entered the service with suppressed emotional or mental problems–just waiting for the wrong stimulus to trigger a psychological hailstorm.
When it comes to mental toughness and hardiness, service members are like the proverbial box of chocolates. You never know what you are going to get until something happens to show you what you got.
August 26, 2010 Comments Off
As most of you know from reading my past posts, I have a soft spot for what it truly means to be a criminal defense lawyer. Others share my passion.
Brian Tannebaum is one. Check out his latest blog post here. It encapsulates a lot of what we think. Brian is also the current president of the Florida Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers.
August 26, 2010 Comments Off
In the last couple of days, criminal defense blogs have been en fuego because of the recent article by Hartley, R.D., et. al., Do you get what you pay for? Type of counsel and its effect on criminal court outcomes, Journal of Criminal Justice (2010) highlighted by the American Bar Association. The basic conclusion of Hartley is that public defenders have just as much success in representing their clients as private practice defenders.
Naturally, both private practitioners and public defenders have their own takes on this issue. Two great analyses of this article are from Scott Greenfield and Mark Bennett, and I encourage you to read their opinions (please note that Mr. Bennett’s analysis is contained in 6 separate entries, starting with this one and ending with this exclamation). The most notable gripe from those in private practice is that Hartley heaps praise upon the closeness of public defenders with their prosecutorial counterparts as well as the judiciary. His definition of good defense work causes the most consternation, and this definition defies what most members of the defense bar believe to be zealous advocacy. Hartley lauds the existence of a courthouse “workgroup” that facilitates smooth case processing and administration of justice.
Workgroup? Justice? Where do I begin?
August 19, 2010 § 2 Comments
This post is in recognition of the recent court decisions declaring the Stolen Valor Act to be unconstitutional.
I am not an Army Ranger, and I never have been.
Some of you will look at my “About Me” page and claim otherwise. After all, you can read it and see it. Right there, under awards and devices, it says “Ranger Tab” and the picture clearly shows a gold and black Ranger Tab affixed to my uniform.
That does not make me a Ranger. It makes me Ranger Qualified–showing that I completed the United States Army Ranger School (in 1997). Only members of the 75th Ranger Regiment (at Ft. Benning, Georgia; Ft. Lewis, Washington; or Hunter Army Airfield, Georgia) are actual Rangers.
I say this for two reasons. First, a lot of people ask me what it was like to be a Ranger. I try to explain the circumstances, but their eyes glaze-over after the first 30 seconds. Second, and more important, I want to address the rash of individuals pretending to be Rangers, SEALs, Green Berets, or having other specialized qualifications by wearing awards and devices they never earned. They are no different from those in Major League Baseball who use steroids. They want to be at the top of their profession. They don’t want to break the law, but the culture in the Army is such that they feel it necessary to do whatever they can to obtain an edge.
August 18, 2010 § 2 Comments
I thought I’d post initially on the case of the United States v. Major Nadal Hasan. In the next few months, that case will begin to heat up in the courtroom as well as in the public forums. Before I begin, lets open with a few ground rules on what might become ongoing commentary by me.
First, I will attempt to avoid second-guessing the lawyers assigned to the case. This, of course, is an extremely tall order considering that there will be times when I will remark on various decisions by Major Hasan’s retained and detailed counsel. For instance, today I will discuss the open posture that the retained defense counsel adopted in the case and whether being so open with the case and his representation is advisable at this point. My goal is to never condemn. Rather, I will discuss the pros and cons of various tactical decisions.
Second, I plan to provide commentary on the proceeding itself. The acts giving rise to the court-martial are of no interest to me except that they are the subject matter. I am focused more on the nuts and bolts of criminal representation–not on the fact that murder is horrible and that what happened at Ft. Hood is a tragedy. I acknowledge that. No argument here.
Third, I have been asked several questions about military trial procedure. I intend to use this case to highlight several key parts of the military trial process that may be instructive to those with interest. For instance, what on earth is an Article 32 hearing? Don’t worry, we’ll get to that eventually.
Fourth, I have no inside information. I am not friends with the defense counsel nor am I friends with the prosecutor. I do not know them. Like many of you, I know what I know from reading media sources and the internet. The only thing that separates me from the average Criminal Defense Lawyer (CDL) is my immersion in military law for the last 6+ years. If you are looking here for breaking news, you are looking in the wrong place.
Fifth, I have never tried a death penalty case, and I have no aspirations to do so. These are few and far between in the military. I may occasionally comment on my opinion of the death penalty (I don’t like it). Also, I may analyze the economical feasibility of the death penalty (its really, really expensive). While much of the trial procedure will be similar to any other court-martial, much of it will also be distinct. For instance, the judge in the case will likely be much more liberal in the granting of continuances and other relief for the defense, and there are logical reasons for this. We will, hopefully, have a solid chance to discuss these logical reasons. However, when it comes to the death penalty, I have not “been there, done that.”
So, lets move forward.
August 16, 2010 Comments Off
I’ve often been asked these two questions:
Why did _____ County take this case and not the military? Or,
Why did the military take this case and not ________ County?
The same also applies when you regard military vs. federal district courts.
The answer to these questions is usually one of the following: a. workload, b. law/sentencing guidelines, or c. ego.
Too often, the answer is C. Ego.
August 16, 2010 Comments Off
All Criminal Defense Lawyers (CDLs) should understand, generally, the military systems for disposing of misconduct.
Yes, I know you are busy. Yes, I know that I am asking you to become generally familiar with a markedly different system of criminal justice. Trust me when I say it will pay dividends and allow you to better represent your clients.