Legal publication fest: November Army Lawyer now online
TJAGLCS is pumping out the scholarship. The November Army Lawyer is now online here. And, be still my heart, it includes an article on legal ethics for appellate counsel: Major Jay L. Thoman, Conquering Competency and Other Professional Responsibility Pointers for Appellate Practitioners, Army Law., Nov. 2011, at 4.
The issue also contains another Lore of the Corps essay by CAAFlog favorite Fred Borch: A “Fragging” in Vietnam: The Story of a Court-Martial for Attempted Murder and Its Aftermath, Army Law., Nov. 2011, at 1.
The issue also contains an article by another military legal writer I love to read: Colonel R. Peter Masterton, A View From the Bench: Immunizing Witnesses, Army Law., Nov. 2011, at 28.
And, while not a military justice article, Brigadier General Mark Martins’ remarks upon receiving the Harvard Law School Medal of Freedom should be read by all. Mark Martins, Rule of Law in Iraq and Afghanistan?, Army Law., Nov. 2011, at 21.
Two caveats for anyone about to read MAJ Thoman’s “pointers” article on professional responsibility in appellate advocacy: (1) note that the author has never been assigned to the Army appellate divisions, nor (for all I can tell) filed a brief to an appellate jurisdiction…it appears that his source of practitioner-oriented advice comes primarily from the “invaluable input from my many friends who are or were assigned to the Government and Defense Appellate Divisions.” (see bio footnote, page 4) If he were not a faculty member teaching at TJAGLCS, one wonders whether his background (or lack of it in this context) would make him a credible author about the PRACTICE of appellate litigation. [moreover, if writing a guide or reference to be used in the field by practicing appellate counsel, the author [and editors of Army Lawyer) should add a clear disclaimer: "The author has not practiced before the military appellate courts; however, the law and regulations governing legal ethics apply in less-obvious though still critical ways to the appellate practice, and this article will describe how..."] After all, this is not a law review article per se, where research, writing, and arguments can be divorced entirely from the author’s practical experience. (2) Moving beyond my issues with the author’s credibility, he also slants the piece almost entirely toward practicing from the Defense perspective; there is no sense of a balanced discussion of the challenges and unique responsibilities of counsel from both government and defense sides of the aisle. Since the article is designed for generic ”Appellate Practitioners,” I was surprised to read from this slanted perspective.