Articles Posted in Manual for Courts-Martial

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…

YOUR MILITARY DEFENSE COUNSEL SHOULD CHALLENGE THE APPLICATION OF THE MILITARY RULE OF EVIDENCE 311. THE RULE VIOLATES THE U.S. CONSTITUTION. WE ARE CHALLENGING THAT AT THE U. S. SUPREME COURT NOW. In many courts-martial, your military defense counsel will have to deal with evidence obtained from digital devices, like cell phones. The prosecution’s use…

A proposal that a military defense lawyer might face in the future. LtCol Greg Curley, Exploitation. 230 Mil. L. Rev. 421 (2023). The author proposes the adoption of an enumerated offense under UCMJ Art. 134, which he suggests would criminalize “Precursor Behaviors to Sexual Assault.” As part of the offense, he also suggests what most…

As you know, Military Rule of Evidence 1102 provides that, Amendments to the Federal Rules of Evidence – other than Articles III and V – will amend parallel provisions of the Military Rules of Evidence by operation of law 18 months after the effective date of such amendments, unless action to the contrary is taken…

The Virginia legislature has passed SB1563. There are several provisions which should be adopted in military cases. D. Whenever the Commonwealth intends to introduce expert opinion testimony at trial, the attorney for the Commonwealth shall notify in writing the accused of the Commonwealth’s intent to present such testimony not later than 14 days before trial,…

The Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces has decided United States v. Wilson, __ M.J. __, No. 16-0267/AR, for the appellant. The issue was: Whether the military judge erred in denying the defense motion for appropriate relief under Rule for Court-Martial 917 where the military judge improperly applied Article 130, housebreaking, to a motor…

In United States v. Mercier, __ M.J. __, No. 20160318 (C.G. Ct. Crim. App. Mar. 18, 2016) the court denied a Government interlocutory appeal of a military judge’s ruling that found that a specification was improperly referred and dismissed the specification without prejudice. This would seem to be a perfect opportunity to take up, again,…

My title is the title of an excellent article in the Air Force Reporter by Thomas G. Becker. Mr. Becker takes on the amount of damage done to military justice and the truth-seeking process because of the changes to Article 32 proceedings.

The DoD Joint Service Committee on Military Justice (JSC) will hold a public meeting on new proposals. The notice of the meeting and the proposals can be found at 74 Fed. Reg. 47785. For those not attending the meeting comments can be submitted in writing /NIMJ.