BAH/TAD fraud cases cane be complex for a lot of different reasons.  But here is a reminder of one aspect from the Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals in, United States v. Peters.  This is actually a common mistake by the prosecution when charging fake receipts, and when charging for multiple acts that are performed when submitting a claim.

We are troubled by some of the specifications of false official statements and by the specifications of forgery. We merge two of the specifications of false official statements, set aside the findings on forgery, and affirm the approved sentence.

We take judicial notice that the computer process of electronically submitting a DD Form 1351-2 ends with a final computer entry that is considered an electronic signature. For each claim, Appellant made a single statement when he made the final entry.

Some prosecutors get carried away with their mission and over over-egg their argument.  In a winnable case it shouldn’t be necessary.  If you’ve got a bad case, but get a conviction it may lead to reversal.  Here’s another example.

A Connecticut appeals court decided to send a message to a prosecutor accused of appealing to jurors’ emotions when it reversed the conviction of a man accused of killing a bar owner in 1998 and ordered a new trial.

The appeals court opinion (PDF) said Assistant State’s Attorney Terence Mariani Jr. of Waterbury made improper arguments in the trial of Victor Santiago, as well as in previous cases, the Associated Press and the Connecticut Law Tribune report. “We believe that nothing short of reversal will have the effect of deterring him,” the court said.

I posted a while back about the Texas prosecutor arrested and being prosecuted for Brady violations.

Here is a link from Prof. Berman about

The investigative journalism website ProPublica has now published another installment in its notable series of pieces concerning the problems of prosecutorial misconduct.  The series is titled "Out of Order: When Prosecutors Cross the Line," and here are links to all the pieces from the beginning:

Judges confronted with allegations of racial or ethnic bias among jurors are allowed to investigate the claims, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals ruled yesterday. The opinion created a new exception to case law historically barring judges from questioning jurors about their process. 

h/t The Blog of Legal Times.

Kittle v. United States, quotable quotes.

Contact Information