82 - United States v. Campos and MRE 404(b) regarding Charged Conduct

from Litigator Libations · host Darrel-the-DCAP

Send us Fan MailToday we discuss the CAAF case of United States v. Campos, decided on February 19, 2025. It is an important case for defense counsel because the court provides important distinctions between what might be admissible as aggravation evidence in the prosecution's sentencing case, but is improper in an unsworn victim impact statement. We then hear from Major Ciara Ryan who discusses how to object when the government notices M.R.E. 404(b) evidence, but the evidence they seek to admit for a relevant non-propensity purpose is already coming in to prove a separate charged offense.

Episode metadata supplied by the publisher feed · Published Mar 7, 2025

Embed this episode

Attribution link and audio player

NOW PLAYING

82 - United States v. Campos and MRE 404(b) regarding Charged Conduct

0:00 23:36

1×

No transcript for this episode yet

We transcribe on demand. Request one and we'll notify you when it's ready — usually under 10 minutes.

Share this episode

Similar Episodes

No similar episodes found.

Similar Podcasts

Viva Frei - Recovering Former Litigator! From Law to Politics & Beyond David Freiheit Viva Frei Podcast - Breaking down the law, democratizing information Make No Law: The First Amendment Podcast Legal Talk Network Ken White explores the background of important First Amendment cases and the personalities and history that led to them. Join Ken, First Amendment litigator and law blogger at Popehat.com, as he interviews some of the people behind America’s most important free speech cases. Charter: A Course - A podcast about Canadian Constitutional Law & Litigation David Asper Center for Constitutional Rights About the Series Charter: A Course is a podcast created by the David Asper Centre for Constitutional Rights (the Asper Centre) and hosted by the Asper Centre’s Executive Director Cheryl Milne. Charter: A Course focuses on Canadian constitutional law and litigation. In each episode, we highlight the accomplishments of U of T Law’s faculty and alumni involved in leading constitutional cases and issues. Each episode also includes a “Practice Corner,” where we talk about the ins and outs of what it means to be a constitutional litigator. Whether you are a law student, a lawyer, or just an interested person, we hope that you learn about an aspect of constitutional law and litigation that interests you in our podcast. Picking Justice Harry Plotkin & Dan Kramer Attention Trial Lawyers: You’ve meticulously crafted your opening statement, mastered your directs and crosses, and fine-tuned your closing argument. But have you developed a strategy for jury selection? What will you do when a potential juror gives an unexpected answer? Do you even want that person on your jury? The clock is ticking — you need to think fast.Introducing Picking Justice, the essential podcast for trial lawyers. Join nationally renowned jury consultant Harry Plotkin and leading trial lawyer Dan Kramer as they guide you through the complex art of jury selection.Harry and Dan share invaluable insights and real-world strategies, breaking down the myths and misconceptions that often hold lawyers back in the courtroom.Whether you’re a seasoned litigator or preparing for your first big case, Picking Justice offers expert guidance to help you make smarter choices during jury selection.Subscribe today and elevate your trial skills with Picking Justice.

Frequently Asked Questions

How long is this episode of Litigator Libations?

This episode is 23 minutes long.

When was this Litigator Libations episode published?

This episode was published on March 7, 2025.

Can I download this Litigator Libations episode?

Yes. Use the download control on the episode player to save the publisher-provided media file.

URL copied to clipboard!