Articles Posted in Uncategorized

http://globalmjreform.blogspot.com/2015/11/in-good-to-see-category.html

The government filed its answer in Bergdahl v. Burke at CAAF today.

You may note on page 1,before getting to the merits.

• It misidentifies the parties/

Click to access Bergdahl-NBC-News-Amicus-Brief.pdf

See more of the litigation at https://www.court-martial.com/bergdahl-appellate-litigation.html

The Joint Service Committee on Military Justice has proposed new rules for courts-martial, including rules of evidence.  The proposal is open for public comment.

There is much to think about, some good, some possibly bad, and as I note below, some odd.

I have updated events of today:

Bergdahl.

ACCA denies Hearst, et., al. petition for extraordinary writ.

Here are two items of potential interest to military justice practitioners from Volume 68 VANDERBILT L. REV.

Todd Haugh, Overcriminalization’s New Harm Paradigm, 68 Vand. L. Rev. 1191 (2015).

Joshua D. Foote, Hung Up on Words: A Conduct-Based Solution to the Problem of Conspiracy in Military Commissions, 68 Vand. L. Rev. 1367 (2015).

In United States v. Starovoytov, the accused plead guilty.

[T]of 5 charges and 18 specifications involving sodomy with children between the ages of 12 and 16, aggravated sexual abuse of children, abusive sexual contact of a child, indecent liberties with children, possessing and producing child pornography, and providing alcohol to persons under the age of 21, in violation of Articles 120, 125, and 134, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. §§ 920, 925, 934.

He was sentenced to

Even in Canada prosecutors play Discovery Games.

No. 16-0053/AF. U.S. v. Shelby L. Williams. CCA 38454.  Notice is hereby given that a certificate for review of the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals was filed under Rule 22 on this date on the following issues:

1. WHETHER THE AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS ERRED BY FINDING THAT THE TRIAL DEFENSE COUNSEL SUFFICIENTLY OBJECTED TO THE ADMISSION OF THE EVIDENCE RELATING TO A PREGNANCY AND MISCARRIAGE.
2. WHETHER THE AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS ERRED BY FINDING THAT THE MILITARY JUDGE ABUSED HER DISCRETION WHEN SHE ADMITTED TESTIMONY PURSUANT TO MIL. R. EVID. 413, AND ERRED IN FINDING PREJUDICE?

Today the court informed us that the Chief Justice approved our request to extend the time to file the petition until 13 December 2015.