First CAAF opinion for the term

United States v. Savard.

We granted review to determine whether the military judge erred by failing to hold defense-requested pretrial hearings before ruling on Appellant’s written motions. We hold that, when one of the parties so requests, Rule for Courts-Martial (R.C.M.) 905(h) requires that the military judge hold a hearing on a written motion.  (Emphasis added.)

Note in United States v. Jones argued this week one of the issues was the military judge making decisions in an R.C.M. 802 session; a procedure that is not allowed unless the parties consent.  In a similar vein to Hutchins, the lawyers and the judge made decisions affecting the accused of which the accused was not made aware, and now the government says that the accused waived the issue.

Lack of communication with the client about matters happening on the case is not a good idea.