CAAF issues opinion in Jones

United States v. Jones.

A convoluted case about the accused’s ability to review CP images in preparation for his providence inquiry.

We conclude that the denial of the requests to review
evidence under the circumstances of this case did not
violate the Sixth Amendment because Appellant did not seek
to review the evidence to prepare a defense, and that
Appellant’s unconditional guilty plea waived appellate
review of the denial of his discovery requests under Rule
for Courts-Martial (R.C.M.) 701.  And we agree with the
NMCCA that, considering the stipulation of fact in
conjunction with Appellant’s providence inquiry, there was
no substantial basis in law or fact for the military judge
to reject Appellant’s guilty plea in this case.  Jones,
2009 CCA LEXIS 356, at *21, 2009 WL 3435920, at *7.