There are a couple of interesting items in Vol. 224, MIL. L. REV.
MILITARY JUSTICE INCOMPETENCE OVER COMPETENCY DETERMINATIONS, by Major David C. Lai. This is relevant to me because I have an appellate case where there are issues with the client’s current competency and there were at trial.
ALWAYS ON DUTY: CAN I ORDER YOU TO REPORT CRIMES OR INTERVENE? By Major Matthew E. Dyson. This is highly relevant in regard to the ongoing sexual assault issues and considerations of by-stander behavior.
After a lengthy down time, CAAF and AFCCA are back on line.
The military does not have mandatory minimum confinement sentences (and I hope we never have them). But this federal case is certainly interesting.
US v. Collins, No. 15-3236 (6th Cir. June 29, 2016) (available here).
It’s just sad that the public, and more importantly practitioners before the court have to rely on handouts from colleagues to get news out there about events in the CAAF.
Here’s another. In United States v. Commisso, CAAF has granted on the following issue.
WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE ABUSED HIS DISCRETION IN DENYING THE DEFENSE’S POST-TRIAL MOTION FOR A MISTRIAL, THEREBY VIOLATING APPELLANT’S RIGHT TO HAVE HIS CASE DECIDED BY A PANEL OF FAIR AND IMPARTIAL MEMBERS, BECAUSE THREE PANEL MEMBERS FAILED TO DISCLOSE THAT THEY HAD PRIOR KNOWLEDGE OF THE CASE.
A friend brought to my attention this little item for our weekend reading.
NOTES: PROSECUTORIAL POWER AND THE LEGITIMACY OF THE MILITARY JUSTICE SYSTEM. 123 HARVARD L. REV. 937 (2010).
Is the concluding paragraph correct?
Since Denedo, and definitely since Padilla, military defense counsel must tell a client about the potential for deportation.
A former U.S. Marine from Jamaica who was convicted by special court-martial of having sex with a girl younger than 16 is eligible for deportation, the Third Circuit ruled.
Gurson Gourzong, a native of Jamaica, was admitted to the U.S. as a lawful permanent resident in 1983, and thereafter joined the U.S. Marine Corps.
The Department of Defense (DoD) is publishing this notice to announce that it is renewing the charter for the Judicial Proceedings Since Fiscal Year 2012 Amendments Panel (“the Panel”).
The National Post (Canada) reports:
The Canadian Forces has distributed 120,000 wallet-size cards to military personnel to remind them that sexual assault is an “inappropriate” behaviour.
The cards are to be carried by military staff on the job, including when they are sent overseas.
I came across a couple of Air Force opinions and have posted about habeas corpus and coram nobis.
On 20 May 2016, the President, exercising his powers under UCMJ art. 36, signed an executive order amending the Manual for Courts-Martial. Changes to the rules of evidence are included. It was a change to Rule 311 that has draw significant attention and discussion among the UCMJ literati. Basically, a military judge grants suppression when
“exclusion of the evidence results in appreciable deterrence of future unlawful searches or seizures and the benefits of such deterrence outweigh the costs to the justice system.”
Mil. R. Evid. 311(a)(3) (2016).
Court-Martial Trial Practice Blog
