Court-Martial Trial Practice

For those following the animal cruelty case at Fort Bliss, and also noting CAAFLogs reference to a potential new “charge” in the UCMJ of animal cruelty, here is a public discussion by the Fort Bliss garrision commander about his decision to issue an Article 15, UCMJ, punishment.

Fort Bliss Garrison Commander Col. Edward Manning talked to KFOX about the latest on the Frank Zimmerman case and his punishment.

As KFOX reported, Spc. Zimmerman who is charged with animal cruelty received an official reprimand by Manning, himself in April. Zimmerman is accused of stomping on the neck of his dog Tinkerbell and breaking his other dog, Wrigley’s, hind leg.

CAAF has granted review in United States v. Trew of this issue (this is a link to Trew’s discussion on CAAFLog and the NMCCA opinion) (and here is my earlier post):

WHETHER, IN LIGHT OF UNITED STATES v. WALTERS, 58 M.J. 391 (C.A.A.F. 2003) AND UNITED STATES v. SEIDER, 60 M.J. 36 (C.A.A.F. 2004), THE CHARGE AND SPECIFICATION MUST BE DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, BECAUSE THE LOWER COURT COULD NOT CONDUCT A PROPER APPELLATE REVIEW UNDER ARTICLE 66 AND DOUBLE JEOPARDY PREVENTS A REHEARING. SEE UNITED STATES v. WILSON __ M.J. ___ (C.A.A.F. 2009).

There has been quite a bit of “heated” discussion on CAAFLog about United States v. Wilson, and how the Walters issue in that case was resolved.

United States v. Lindsey, the dishonorable failure to pay just debt case is now on line.  While prosecution in this case seems reasonable, I’m always concerned when the military begins to act as a debt collection agency.

United States v. Daniel, is an unpublished opinion about admission without objection of a photograph.

Appellant now contends that Special Agent Green could not properly authenticate the photographs because he had no personal knowledge that they were taken from appellant’s computer, and could not identify the photographs as depicting the assault1 because he only heard SC talk about it, yet SC was passed out when the photographs were taken. He also notes that there was no foundation laid as to how the photographs came into CGIS’s possession.

United States v. Marshall, __ M.J. ___ (C.A.A.F. 2009).

This is a fatal variance case.

Appellant pled not guilty to escaping from the custody of Captain (CPT) Kreitman but was convicted, by exceptions and substitutions, of escaping from the custody of Staff Sergeant (SSG) Fleming. We granted review to consider whether the military judge’s findings created a fatal variance. We hold that it did.

Coast Guard O-6 convicted of cocaine use.