Comments on: New Supreme Court search and seizure case http://www.caaflog.com/2009/04/23/new-supreme-court-search-and-seizure-case/ Covering the Military Justice System Fri, 10 Feb 2012 20:54:06 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Anonymous http://www.caaflog.com/2009/04/23/new-supreme-court-search-and-seizure-case/comment-page-1/#comment-7245 Anonymous Mon, 27 Apr 2009 02:09:00 +0000 http://tx18.westnic.net/~caaflog/?p=1948#comment-7245 Hey, I am curious, don't (I know in the AF they are) all JAGS start off pretty much as a TC (or claims)? Hey, I am curious, don’t (I know in the AF they are) all JAGS start off pretty much as a TC (or claims)?

]]> By: John O'Connor http://www.caaflog.com/2009/04/23/new-supreme-court-search-and-seizure-case/comment-page-1/#comment-7236 John O'Connor Sun, 26 Apr 2009 03:10:00 +0000 http://tx18.westnic.net/~caaflog/?p=1948#comment-7236 Well, I am below average . . . Well, I am below average . . .

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.caaflog.com/2009/04/23/new-supreme-court-search-and-seizure-case/comment-page-1/#comment-7230 Anonymous Sun, 26 Apr 2009 01:05:00 +0000 http://tx18.westnic.net/~caaflog/?p=1948#comment-7230 J'OC,<br /><br />I don't think anyone called you "stupid"....just "average" to "below average." So, you have that going for you...which is nice. J’OC,

I don’t think anyone called you “stupid”….just “average” to “below average.” So, you have that going for you…which is nice.

]]> By: John Paul http://www.caaflog.com/2009/04/23/new-supreme-court-search-and-seizure-case/comment-page-1/#comment-7226 John Paul Sat, 25 Apr 2009 21:45:00 +0000 http://tx18.westnic.net/~caaflog/?p=1948#comment-7226 Suggestion: Anyone who wants to characterize an entire side of the bar as "mouthbreathers" and then defend their choice of words by suggesting those individuals were selected to be TCs b/c they were "below average", should perhaps have the integrity to identify themselves by name when making such comments.<br /><br />Seems rather childish to do otherwise. Just a thought. Suggestion: Anyone who wants to characterize an entire side of the bar as “mouthbreathers” and then defend their choice of words by suggesting those individuals were selected to be TCs b/c they were “below average”, should perhaps have the integrity to identify themselves by name when making such comments.

Seems rather childish to do otherwise. Just a thought.

]]> By: John O'Connor http://www.caaflog.com/2009/04/23/new-supreme-court-search-and-seizure-case/comment-page-1/#comment-7223 John O'Connor Sat, 25 Apr 2009 13:03:00 +0000 http://tx18.westnic.net/~caaflog/?p=1948#comment-7223 That's the smart move because the rule probably applies in all its particulars. And if it doesn't fully apply, it won't be completely inapplicable, but rather there will be a wrinkle here or there on its application. That’s the smart move because the rule probably applies in all its particulars. And if it doesn’t fully apply, it won’t be completely inapplicable, but rather there will be a wrinkle here or there on its application.

]]> By: Jason Grover http://www.caaflog.com/2009/04/23/new-supreme-court-search-and-seizure-case/comment-page-1/#comment-7221 Jason Grover Sat, 25 Apr 2009 09:06:00 +0000 http://tx18.westnic.net/~caaflog/?p=1948#comment-7221 Anon 0550, <br />I forgot to mention I talked about the case to the local NCIS folks yesterday and they had already been briefed on it. My impression was they were planning on following it. Anon 0550,
I forgot to mention I talked about the case to the local NCIS folks yesterday and they had already been briefed on it. My impression was they were planning on following it.

]]> By: Jason Grover http://www.caaflog.com/2009/04/23/new-supreme-court-search-and-seizure-case/comment-page-1/#comment-7220 Jason Grover Sat, 25 Apr 2009 09:04:00 +0000 http://tx18.westnic.net/~caaflog/?p=1948#comment-7220 JO'C,<br />You and me both. I asked to go be an SDC for my next tour and they made me the STC. Now I know why! JO’C,
You and me both. I asked to go be an SDC for my next tour and they made me the STC. Now I know why!

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.caaflog.com/2009/04/23/new-supreme-court-search-and-seizure-case/comment-page-1/#comment-7215 Anonymous Fri, 24 Apr 2009 21:50:00 +0000 http://tx18.westnic.net/~caaflog/?p=1948#comment-7215 I can't think of any good reason why Gant wouldn't be applied with the same force and effect in the military. The analysis to the rule makes it clear that the rule is based directly on the drafters' views of Chimel and Belton, and not on any special claim of military necessity. I can’t think of any good reason why Gant wouldn’t be applied with the same force and effect in the military. The analysis to the rule makes it clear that the rule is based directly on the drafters’ views of Chimel and Belton, and not on any special claim of military necessity.

]]> By: John O'Connor http://www.caaflog.com/2009/04/23/new-supreme-court-search-and-seizure-case/comment-page-1/#comment-7205 John O'Connor Fri, 24 Apr 2009 14:41:00 +0000 http://tx18.westnic.net/~caaflog/?p=1948#comment-7205 Anon 1001,<br /><br />That's funny, I always thought the conspiracy theory was that the good lawyers go to TC billets. And after all this time, I didn't realize that they made me a TC because they had determined I was stupid. Anon 1001,

That’s funny, I always thought the conspiracy theory was that the good lawyers go to TC billets. And after all this time, I didn’t realize that they made me a TC because they had determined I was stupid.

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.caaflog.com/2009/04/23/new-supreme-court-search-and-seizure-case/comment-page-1/#comment-7204 Anonymous Fri, 24 Apr 2009 14:37:00 +0000 http://tx18.westnic.net/~caaflog/?p=1948#comment-7204 I once saw a TC breathing through his nose, but he was a former DC who always provided full discovery to the accused. I once saw a TC breathing through his nose, but he was a former DC who always provided full discovery to the accused.

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.caaflog.com/2009/04/23/new-supreme-court-search-and-seizure-case/comment-page-1/#comment-7202 Anonymous Fri, 24 Apr 2009 14:01:00 +0000 http://tx18.westnic.net/~caaflog/?p=1948#comment-7202 JOC,<br /><br />The same pool does not mean all those within that pool are equal. It's pretty common knowledge that the best of the pool are selected for defense work b/c there's more at stake. The TC jobs, for the most part, go to the average (or below average) folks who stick around long enough and have to graduate from legal assistance/claims/admin law. The gov't still gets plenty of wins b/c they have such a huge advantage anyway, and the less-talented TC's can't submarine all of them. But, then again, sometimes you get the shenanigans, e.g., Behanna. JOC,

The same pool does not mean all those within that pool are equal. It’s pretty common knowledge that the best of the pool are selected for defense work b/c there’s more at stake. The TC jobs, for the most part, go to the average (or below average) folks who stick around long enough and have to graduate from legal assistance/claims/admin law. The gov’t still gets plenty of wins b/c they have such a huge advantage anyway, and the less-talented TC’s can’t submarine all of them. But, then again, sometimes you get the shenanigans, e.g., Behanna.

]]> By: John O'Connor http://www.caaflog.com/2009/04/23/new-supreme-court-search-and-seizure-case/comment-page-1/#comment-7200 John O'Connor Fri, 24 Apr 2009 12:15:00 +0000 http://tx18.westnic.net/~caaflog/?p=1948#comment-7200 It always adds to the quality of the dialogue to call one side of the aisle "mouthbreathers," when both sides of the aisle are picked from the same pool of judge advocates.<br /><br />I should add on the merits that it's not a sure thing that the 4th Amendment decision just announced will apply in full force and effect in the military context. It probably will, but I think a court will consider the standard of reasonableness from the military standpoint (and perhaps with a modicum of deference). I have no real opinion on the issue because I'm far from a 4th Amendment expert, and it's been a long time since I've thought about search and seizure law in the military. It always adds to the quality of the dialogue to call one side of the aisle “mouthbreathers,” when both sides of the aisle are picked from the same pool of judge advocates.

I should add on the merits that it’s not a sure thing that the 4th Amendment decision just announced will apply in full force and effect in the military context. It probably will, but I think a court will consider the standard of reasonableness from the military standpoint (and perhaps with a modicum of deference). I have no real opinion on the issue because I’m far from a 4th Amendment expert, and it’s been a long time since I’ve thought about search and seizure law in the military.

]]> By: Jason Grover http://www.caaflog.com/2009/04/23/new-supreme-court-search-and-seizure-case/comment-page-1/#comment-7195 Jason Grover Fri, 24 Apr 2009 04:53:00 +0000 http://tx18.westnic.net/~caaflog/?p=1948#comment-7195 Hey Anon 2049,<br />I'm a TC! Hey Anon 2049,
I’m a TC!

]]> By: Dist. Attny. Hamilton Burger http://www.caaflog.com/2009/04/23/new-supreme-court-search-and-seizure-case/comment-page-1/#comment-7194 Dist. Attny. Hamilton Burger Fri, 24 Apr 2009 03:59:00 +0000 http://tx18.westnic.net/~caaflog/?p=1948#comment-7194 Wait a minute: are you saying that the MRE's do NOT trump the Constitution? Wait a minute: are you saying that the MRE’s do NOT trump the Constitution?

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.caaflog.com/2009/04/23/new-supreme-court-search-and-seizure-case/comment-page-1/#comment-7191 Anonymous Fri, 24 Apr 2009 00:49:00 +0000 http://tx18.westnic.net/~caaflog/?p=1948#comment-7191 Of course there'll be a TC who argues that an MRE trumps the Constitution, but that speaks volumes about most TC's, not the absurd argument. I just don't see why so many TC's are such mouthbreathers??? Of course there’ll be a TC who argues that an MRE trumps the Constitution, but that speaks volumes about most TC’s, not the absurd argument. I just don’t see why so many TC’s are such mouthbreathers???

]]> By: Phil Cave http://www.caaflog.com/2009/04/23/new-supreme-court-search-and-seizure-case/comment-page-1/#comment-7187 Phil Cave Fri, 24 Apr 2009 00:41:00 +0000 http://tx18.westnic.net/~caaflog/?p=1948#comment-7187 Maybe.<br />It's a consent issue.<br />But my recollection is a civilian just had a case dismissed at Quantico because the "consent" signs were not properly placed and seeable.<br /><br />Also, which "rule" wins, a constitutional rule or an evidentiary rule? So is there really a conflict with a MRE? I'm sure there will be a TC who will argue that the MRE trumps the constitution, but . . . And does not the Appendix "discussion" of the MRE note that it's based on Chimel? Maybe.
It’s a consent issue.
But my recollection is a civilian just had a case dismissed at Quantico because the “consent” signs were not properly placed and seeable.

Also, which “rule” wins, a constitutional rule or an evidentiary rule? So is there really a conflict with a MRE? I’m sure there will be a TC who will argue that the MRE trumps the constitution, but . . . And does not the Appendix “discussion” of the MRE note that it’s based on Chimel?

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.caaflog.com/2009/04/23/new-supreme-court-search-and-seizure-case/comment-page-1/#comment-7185 Anonymous Thu, 23 Apr 2009 19:47:00 +0000 http://tx18.westnic.net/~caaflog/?p=1948#comment-7185 Aren't all vehicles subject to searches without any cause once on base? Aren’t all vehicles subject to searches without any cause once on base?

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.caaflog.com/2009/04/23/new-supreme-court-search-and-seizure-case/comment-page-1/#comment-7184 Anonymous Thu, 23 Apr 2009 18:28:00 +0000 http://tx18.westnic.net/~caaflog/?p=1948#comment-7184 But the MPs can still toss the car after someone makes the wrong turn off the highway on Lejeune (whenever they reopen 172) or Quantico, correct? But the MPs can still toss the car after someone makes the wrong turn off the highway on Lejeune (whenever they reopen 172) or Quantico, correct?

]]>