Court-Martial Trial Practice Blog

Hutchins certification

June 9, 2010 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

Here is the daily journal entry for Navy TJAG certification of United States v. Hutchins.

No. 10-5003/MC. U.S., Appellant v. Lawrence G. HUTCHINS, Appellee. CCA 200800393. Notice is hereby given that a certificate for review of the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals was filed under Rule 22 on this date on the following issues:

WHETHER THE NAVY-MARINE CORPS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS ERRED IN FINDING, INTER ALIA, THAT THE MILITARY JUDGE SEVERED THE ATTORNEY-CLIENT RELATIONSHIP WITH CAPTAIN BASS?

Post-trial delay

June 9, 2010 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

The CGCCA has issued a per curiam opinion in United States v. Sapp., a SPCM tried at U.S.C.G. Training Center Yorktown.

Before this court, Appellant has assigned two errors: (1) This court should consider the unreasonable and unexplained post-trial delay in determining the sentence that should be approved under Article 66(c); and (2) the promulgating order contains three errors. We grant sentence relief for post-trial delay and otherwise affirm. . . .

Notable delays in post-trial processing are found in the fifty-nine days apparently taken by the military judge to authenticate the record, the seventy-seven days taken after receipt of the authenticated record to produce the SJAR and send it to defense counsel, and the twenty-eight days between Convening Authority action and sending the record to Headquarters. The Memorandum forwarding the record gives no meaningful explanation for these delays, attributing them only to “administrative processing.”

AFCCA Article 62 appeal order

June 8, 2010 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

Yesterday AFCCA issued an order in an Article 62, appeal, in United States v. Harris. There is a rather odd, perhaps bizarre, chronology. What next is the question?

Appellant charged.

Additional charges added.

Counsel’s predictions

June 8, 2010 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

Just the other day, alerted by SCOTUSBlog I posted Jones v. Williams as a case to watch at SCOTUS. The issue once again:

Issue: Whether the Tenth Circuit violated 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1) by granting habeas relief for ineffective assistance of counsel during plea bargain negotiations to a defendant who was later convicted and sentenced in a fair trial, on the ground that the remedy the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals gave to the defendant was constitutionally inadequate, given that the Supreme Court has not clearly established what remedy, if any, is appropriate for ineffective assistance of counsel in such a case.

Now courtesy of the New York Times here is an article that defense counsel, trial counsel, and SJA’s may want to read. It’s a cautionary tale, or perhaps just entertaining.

Up periscope

June 6, 2010 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

Air Force Times reports:

A wing commander lost his job because he not only played favorites but hid unfavorable information from his bosses about a female lieutenant colonel, and recommended her for promotion, according to an Air Force investigation.

Directly from Coast Guard Report blog:

SCOTUS

June 6, 2010 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

SCOTUSBlog has the 3 June 2010 petitions to watch at SCOTUS. Here is an interesting one.

Title: Jones v. Williams
Docket: 09-948
Issue: Whether the Tenth Circuit violated 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1) by granting habeas relief for ineffective assistance of counsel during plea bargain negotiations to a defendant who was later convicted and sentenced in a fair trial, on the ground that the remedy the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals gave to the defendant was constitutionally inadequate, given that the Supreme Court has not clearly established what remedy, if any, is appropriate for ineffective assistance of counsel in such a case.

Opinion below (10th Circuit, rehearing denied)

Petition for certiorari

Brief in opposition

Petitioner’s reply

The relevant “facts.”

Marine Corps officer cheaters

June 5, 2010 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

Marine Corps Times reports that:

A lieutenant expelled from The Basic School in May for cheating on a land navigation exercise is fighting back, saying his punishment was too harsh.

Former 2nd Lt. Adam Ballard, a star fullback at the Naval Academy who now is pursuing a career in the National Football League, was administratively discharged from the Marine Corps on May 20, but says his punishment is unfair because cheating on land navigation at TBS is a wide-spread problem.

An Abu Ghraib post-script?

June 5, 2010 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

The Canadian Press reports that:

Charles Graner was a manipulative sadist, Ivan Frederick sincerely penitent and Lynndie England an infatuated follower who got more notice than her role deserved, according to the authors of a new book on the Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal.

Christopher Graveline helped prosecute the defendants and investigator Michael Clemens assisted the prosecution team. They conclude, not surprisingly, that military justice was served by the criminal convictions of 11 low-ranking soldiers and the nonjudicial punishment of a handful of officers.

LTC Lakin update on WorldNetDaily

June 3, 2010 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

WorldNetDaily has commented on the recent memorandum issued by the Article 32, UCMJ, IO in LTC Lakin’s case.

But Lakin said the result "makes it impossible for me to have a fair hearing."

"I cannot even raise the issue of the president’s eligibility, on the grounds that my position has ‘no basis in law,’" he said

Up periscope

June 3, 2010 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

Navy Times reports that:

An active-duty Seabee is wanted for questioning in the slaying of his pregnant wife, authorities said.

Steelworker First Class (SCW) Eric Gilford, 31, disappeared after his wife, Kristine, was found stabbed to death May 26 in a residence in the Chicago suburb of Villa Park, Illinois authorities said.