The Appellant was accused of having sex with a 12 year old girl, but while the government had free access to talk to the alleged victim to prepare for trial, the defense was not given any opportunity to interview the alleged victim. The military judge ordered the alleged victim to submit to a pretrial deposition in order to remedy this unequal access to crucial evidence. Shortly before trial, the alleged victim was abruptly found unavailable to testify, and, over defense objection, a video of her deposition testimony was played for the jury. The question presented is:
Did the lower court err when it found that the deposition was a Constitutionally effective opportunity for cross-examination, where the deposition was the first and only opportunity for the defense to speak to the alleged victim, and the deposition had been specifically ordered to remedy the defense’s inability to effectively prepare for trial?
Thursday, January 08, 2009
Cabrera-Frattini's progress through the military justice system has been so implausible and absurd, it seems like a Farrelly Brothers movie. Now that movie's final scene is about to be written. The Supremes have docketed a cert petition in the case. Cabrera-Frattini v. United States, No. 08-830. Here's the QP: