Court-Martial Trial Practice

The recent Coast Guard case outlines nicely for an accused and military defense counsel how an appellate court evaluates lengthy post-trial delay. 1. Governing Framework for Post‑Trial Delay Courts evaluate post‑trial processing under two independent regimes: Doctrine Trigger Test Relief Constitutional Due Process Delay that is facially unreasonable Case‑by‑case screening (after United States v. Chock,…

What is the bottom line for a military defense counsel or accused who want to sever court-martial charges? Southworth is the leading military case on the subject. Factual Synopsis Appellant faced a single, joint general court‑martial for two sexual‑assault episodes committed on successive evenings, 5–6 August 1995. The first involved AL, an adult Navy sailor,…

In Weisbeck, the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces addressed the question of a delay in trial after the accused hired a civilian counsel. This is a case your military defense counsel should be aware of. The case does not hold that a delay is automatic, but it does outline how an accused may…

Here is a summary of an interesting article about how the Army FAP denies a servicemember of due process, and recommending changes. We at Cave & Freeburg, have represented many servicemembers caught up in the FAP. Executive Summary The article critiques the U.S. Army’s Family Advocacy Program Incident Determination Committee (IDC), arguing that the IDC’s…

Your military defense counsel will discuss with you the terms and requirements of a pretrial agreement, should you decide it is in your best interest to get “a deal.” However, once that deal is signed, the judge accepts it, and it is now on appeal, it is hard to get the appellate court to reduce…

Summary and Analysis of the Opinion: Deference Owed to the Military Justice System and the Limits of Collateral Review by Federal District Courts The review is based on Csady v. Ashworth, but it is equally applicable when federal courts examine habeas corpus petitions from military prisoners under 28 U.S.C. 2241. I. Overview and Holding The…

You are on trial for an offense and the prosecution wants to introduce evidence against you under Military Rule of Evidence 404(b). How does that work and what can your military defense lawyer do to exclude such evidence. The first step is to object to the evidence before trial by filing a motion in-limine. Your…

In United States v. Urieta, The appellant, a specialist in the U.S. Army, was charged with multiple sexual assault offenses and a false official statement. During voir dire at his court-martial, he challenged the selection of Sergeant First Class (SFC) Bravo as a panel member, arguing actual and implied bias based on SFC Bravo’s statements…

When the government does not like the decision of a Court of Criminal Appeals–because it favors the Appellant, the Government has an automatic “appeal.” It’s called certifying the issue. This is an example of unfairness and discrimination in the appellate process which military defense lawyers are well aware of. So, how does that work. The…

I. Introduction Stalking is a serious offense under military law, reflecting the military’s commitment to protecting service members from harassment, intimidation, and threats. It is criminalized under Article 130 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), which was introduced as part of the 2013 amendments under the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal…