
Sign up to save your podcasts
Or


Send us Fan Mail
Today we discuss the recent and significant case of United States v. Mendoza, where CAAF holds that evidence that a named victim lacked the capacity to consent due to impairment by drugs or alcohol, will not support a conviction for sexual assault without consent under Article 120(b)(2)(A). This case will have a big impact on how sexual assault cases are charged and litigated going forward. We also hear from Major Ciara Ryan on member instructions -- she provides great thoughts on being creative to ensure your client gets the instructions most favorable to the defense.
By Sam Castanien & Trevor Ward5
1919 ratings
Send us Fan Mail
Today we discuss the recent and significant case of United States v. Mendoza, where CAAF holds that evidence that a named victim lacked the capacity to consent due to impairment by drugs or alcohol, will not support a conviction for sexual assault without consent under Article 120(b)(2)(A). This case will have a big impact on how sexual assault cases are charged and litigated going forward. We also hear from Major Ciara Ryan on member instructions -- she provides great thoughts on being creative to ensure your client gets the instructions most favorable to the defense.

113,294 Listeners

56,982 Listeners

14,333 Listeners

15,490 Listeners

29,273 Listeners

16,494 Listeners