Court-Martial Trial Practice

Three of which have discussion.

United States v. Hohman.  It’s a Marine case along the lines of Hutchins, et. al.

The Government alleges the military judge erred in abating the court-martial proceedings until the appellee’s previously detailed military defense counsel is returned to the defense team.  Subsequent to
the Government’s filing of the interlocutory appeal, the appellee filed a Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction.  On 1 December 2010, we heard oral argument on the Motion to Dismiss and the interlocutory appeal.  After considering the record of trial and the parties’ pleadings, we deny the appellee’s motion to dismiss and conclude that good cause exists to sever the attorney-client relationship.  The Government’s appeal is granted.

United States v. Pope.

We granted review of four issues in this case:

WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE ABUSED HIS DISCRETION BY ADMITTING A GREEN DETOXIFICATION DRINK UNDER THE DOCTRINE OF SIMILAR PHYSICAL EVIDENCE.
WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE COMMITTED PLAIN ERROR WHEN HE FAILED TO GIVE A LIMITING INSTRUCTION THAT AN EXHIBIT WAS BEING ENTERED INTO EVIDENCE FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY.
WHETHER IT WAS PLAIN ERROR FOR THE MILITARY JUDGE TO ALLOW TRIAL COUNSEL TO ELICIT TESTIMONY ON APPELLANT’S RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT AND TO ALLOW TRIAL COUNSEL TO COMMENT ON THIS DURING HIS FINDINGS ARGUMENT.
WHETHER THE CONTESTED FINDINGS AND SENTENCE IN THE PRESENT CASE SHOULD BE SET ASIDE UNDER THE CUMULATIVE ERROR DOCTRINE.

Navy Times reports:

Navy Times has obtained fired carrier commander Capt. Owen Honors’ statement to investigators, in which he said several of his superior officers were aware of, and in some cases, encouraged the shipboard videos that got him fired earlier this year.

The 15-page declaration is signed and dated Jan. 12, eight days after Adm. John Harvey, head of Fleet Forces Command, fired Honors for showing “exceptionally poor judgment” by producing and airing the videos, which occurred in 2006 and 2007 during his tour as executive officer aboard the carrier Enterprise.

In United States v. Hayes, appellant plead guilty.  However, during his sentencing case

the appellant’s unsworn statement sets forth matter clearly inconsistent with his admission of culpability.  Specifically, the appellant raises the possible defense of duress upon which there is no inquiry by the trial judge.  Duress is a defense to a crime if the accused was compelled or coerced to commit the crime by some human agency, under a threat of serious imminent harm to the accused or others.  United States v. Rockwood, 52 M.J. 98, 112 (C.A.A.F. 1999).

Trial counsel where were you?  One of the primary jobs of a trial counsel during a guilty plea case is to protect the judge and protect the record.  Being a potted plant isn’t good.  An alert trial counsel should be looking out for the record and the judge.  Yes, this error is laid at the door of the judge, but the trial counsel had a role here as well.  Because of the error the case has to be redone.

An unnamed source has revealed that the Navy is in the final iteration of a new order to combat mind altering substances.  The source notes that a proposal is in the works to place all Thai food, Indian food, and similar specialty restaurants off-limits.  They are hoping to cut-off the spicy foods defense thinking back some years to the now discredited brownie defense in THC cases.

Based on the broad definitional language in the current order a number of personnel have queried whether it is safe to eat in “foreign” restaurants or buy food in the specialty foods aisle at the grocery.  Noting the presence of possibly illegal substances at the commissary in the spice section a senior military official has leaked the latest antidrug slogan – “Meat and Potato’s are best for you, avoid that foreign food.”  It’s also thought a new militarized edition of Mr. Potato will be in the NEX for Christmas – Mr. Potato in cammies, with a folding stock M4 option.

Navy Compass reports:

Navy leaders are expressing alarm at recent statistics that show that sailors’ use of "Spice" and similar so-called designer drugs rose in the last quarter of 2010. Spice and similar products are essentially an herbal, synthetic form of marijuana, mimicking the chemical compounds found in the drug. These products are banned for Navy personnel.

The Air Force is also clarifying the confusion.