Court-Martial Trial Practice

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.

Wired.com reports:

Army commanders were warned against sending to Iraq an Army private who is suspected of leaking hundreds of thousands of sensitive documents to the secret-spilling site WikiLeaks.

Pfc. Bradley Manning’s supervisor at Ft. Drum in New York had told his superiors that Manning had discipline problems and had thrown chairs at colleagues and shouted at higher-ranking soldiers,according to a report by McClatchy News service.

Dayton Daily News reports:

William C. Gurney, former top enlisted man at the Air Force Materiel Command headquarters at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, was sentenced at his court-martial on Friday to 20 months in military prison.

Air Force Times reports:

United States v. Luke.

ERDMANN, J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which BAKER, J., joined.  RYAN, J., filed a separate concurring opinion.  STUCKY, J., filed a separate opinion concurring in part and
dissenting in part.  EFFRON, C.J., filed a separate dissenting opinion.

We now review the following three issues:  whether newly discovered evidence would probably have produced a substantially more favorable result; whether the military judge erred when he held that the Government was not required to disclose Prosecution Exhibit (PE) 17 to the defense in pretrial discovery; and whether Luke’s due process rights
have been violated by the lengthy post-trial processing of his appeal.  We hold that the newly discovered evidence would probably not have produced a substantially more favorable result; if the military judge erred in holding that the Government was not required to provide the defense with PE 17 in pretrial discovery, it was harmless error; and Luke’s post-trial due process rights were not violated.  We therefore affirm the Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals.