85 - United States v. Urieta, United States v. Valentin-Andino, & Prior Statements

In this episode we discuss the case of United States v. Urieta, where CAAF found an abuse of discretion in a military judge's failure to grant a defense challenge for implied balance in light of the liberal grant mandate.  We also discuss United States v. Valentin-Andino, which makes clear that "appropriate relief" may not feel like any relief at all to the client.  We also get to hear from Major Rebecca Saathoff on  strategic considerations when objecting (or hoping opposing counsel fails to object) to a proper confrontation of a witness with a prior inconsistent statement.  

Chapters

• 1:19 United States v. Urieta
• 13:00 United States v. Valentin Andino
• 16:59 Prior Inconsistent Statements - substantive or not?
• 28:17 Outro