Litigator Libations

Author: Sam Castanien & Trevor Ward

Updates and tips on defensive litigation in military justice including discussing recent appellate decisions and providing advocacy tips.
Be a guest on this podcast

Language: en-us

Genres: Education, Government

Contact email: Get it

Feed URL: Get it

iTunes ID: Get it

Get all podcast data

Listen Now...

94 - How U.S. v. Casillas Clarifies (or Confuses) U.S. v. Mendoza.
Episode 94
Friday, 17 October, 2025

Send us a textIn their debut episode as hosts, Sam and Trevor discuss the recent CAAF decision,United States v. Casillas, __ M.J. __, 2025 CAAF LEXIS 692 (C.A.A.F. 2025). Casillas clarifies (or confuses?) the holding in United States v. Mendoza, 85 M.J. 213 (C.A.A.F. 2024), that cases charging a “without consent” theory of liability under Article 120, UCMJ, cannot be proven where the complaining witness is incapable of consenting, i.e., asleep or unconscious. Sam and Trevor also discuss a recent Navy CCA decision, United States v. Grafton, No. 202400055, 2025 LX 342911 (N-M. Ct. Crim. App. Aug. 11, 2025), that highlights some of the post-Mendoza influences (or problems?) in military justice practice. Before concluding, the duo briefly discuss instructional errors under Yates v. United States, 354 U.S. 298, (1957). Questions, comments, concerns for the nerds? Email us at Litigator.Libations@gmail.com!