
Sign up to save your podcasts
Or


Send us a text
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 a text
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.

90,932 Listeners

43,818 Listeners

228,694 Listeners

38,800 Listeners

26,224 Listeners

153,509 Listeners

1,066 Listeners

1,942 Listeners

112,200 Listeners

56,496 Listeners

15,863 Listeners

26,623 Listeners

45 Listeners

22 Listeners

619 Listeners