Generally When deciding what a word or term in a statute means, the rule of statutory interpretation is to give the word or term its plain and ordinary meaning. This is known as the plain meaning rule. If the word or term is clear and unambiguous, then the court will not look beyond the text…
Continue reading ›Military lawyers know that since the Supreme Court decided Ramos v. Louisiana, the U. S. military is the only federal jurisdiction that does not require unanimous findings of guilt. Currently, a military jury (called a Panel of Members) must have eight members in a general court-martial (12 if it’s a death penalty case) and four…
Continue reading ›“We thus readily conclude that ex parte communications between a military judge and an SVC are generally proscribed.” Yes, inexplicably, it was necessary for the Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals (AFCCA) to decide such an issue, as part of deciding what impact, if any, SVC’s ex parte communications had in a trial–a chilling thought.…
Continue reading ›The Army Court of Criminal Appeals has raised an interesting question and important reminder in United States v. Keen, decided 20 October 2016. The court itself specified the following issue. WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE ACTED AS COUNSEL OR LEGAL OFFICER AS TO ANY OFFENSE CHARGED OR IN APPELLANT’S CASE GENERALLY OR FORWARDED CHARGES IN APPELLANT’S…
Continue reading ›SCOTUSBlog has an interesting post about the court’s relist practice. Some of us discussed the relist option when the court was considering the petition in United States v. Sullivan, 74 M.J. 448 (C.A.A.F. 2015) cert. denied. When last we wrote about the statistics of relists a little over a year ago, it was to report…
Continue reading ›Brett M. Kavanaugh, The Judge as Umpire: Ten Principles, 65 Cath. U. L. Rev. 683 (2016). First, and most obviously, a good judge, like a good umpire, cannot act as a partisan. Fifth, at the same time, to be a good judge and a good umpire you have to possess some backbone. Sixth, to be…
Continue reading ›
