Rule of Court Martial (R.C.M.) 914 has been coined by many as the “military Jencks Act” in that it requires complete witness statements, reports, and testimonies to be provided upon request after the same witness testifies in court-martial. The purpose of R.C.M. 914 is to allow the opposing party – commonly the defense – to get … Read more
Courts-martial are military courts that try the serious offenses of accused service members. As in civilian courts, a jury sits in on most court-martial cases. However, the selection process differs greatly, especially for Article 120 cases addressing sexual assault and rape. Learn about the differences and how a military defense attorney can help ensure you … Read more
In an interesting development in the Army case of U.S. v. Lewis, the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF) has decided to affirm the Army Court of Criminal Appeal’s (CCA) partial reversal of a lower court’s suppression ruling. Specifically, one out of three suppressed statements from the defendant has lost the suppression ruling’s protection … Read more
If a juvenile commits sexual assault against another minor on a military installation, who has the jurisdiction to prosecute? The federal government has exclusive legislative jurisdiction on many military installations because these are considered federal properties. As a result, local prosecutors lack the legal authority to apply state juvenile delinquency laws to minors living on … Read more
The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) is a strict and complex system governing the lives of United States service members. Accusations of military sexual assault under Article 120 of the UCMJ can devastate your career and reputation. While being falsely accused is a distressing experience, it’s crucial to keep a level head. If you’re … Read more
The United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF) has presented its decision for United States v Kelly. The CAAF’s opinion has held that a Court of Criminal Appeals (CCA) has the legal ability to disapprove a mandatory minimum punitive discharge when the penalty would be “inappropriately severe.” The decision has creates the potential … Read more
The United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF) recently submitted a unanimous decision to conclude the case of U.S. v. Coleman. The decision itself weighs not just on that particular case, but also on many other military criminal justice cases since it directly addressed the question of multiplicity. The CAAF held that Coleman’s case had … Read more
The United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF) has decided to reverse the outcome of the Army child sexual assault case of U.S. v. Frost and authorize a rehearing. During the case, the defense asserted that the alleged child victim had been improperly influenced by her mother into testifying against Frost. It was argued … Read more
As a result of U.S. v. Tovarchavez’s conclusion, the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF) has held that any and all constitutional errors must be reviewed for harmlessness, even if those errors were once preserved by the plain error standard or forfeited without objection. If the error is not found to be “harmless beyond … Read more
The Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF) recently decided upon the Air Force case of U.S. v. Meakin, in which the defendant was convicted of “conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman” — as described in UCMJ Article 133 — carried out through online interactions. He had been sentenced to extensive confinement, total forfeitures, … Read more