Air Force Times reports:
A wing commander lost his job because he not only played favorites but hid unfavorable information from his bosses about a female lieutenant colonel, and recommended her for promotion, according to an Air Force investigation.
SCOTUSBlog has the 3 June 2010 petitions to watch at SCOTUS. Here is an interesting one.
Title: Jones v. Williams
Docket: 09-948
Issue: Whether the Tenth Circuit violated 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1) by granting habeas relief for ineffective assistance of counsel during plea bargain negotiations to a defendant who was later convicted and sentenced in a fair trial, on the ground that the remedy the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals gave to the defendant was constitutionally inadequate, given that the Supreme Court has not clearly established what remedy, if any, is appropriate for ineffective assistance of counsel in such a case.
- Opinion below (10th Circuit, rehearing denied)
- Petition for certiorari
- Brief in opposition
- Petitioner’s reply
The relevant “facts.”
The Canadian Press reports that:
Charles Graner was a manipulative sadist, Ivan Frederick sincerely penitent and Lynndie England an infatuated follower who got more notice than her role deserved, according to the authors of a new book on the Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal.
Christopher Graveline helped prosecute the defendants and investigator Michael Clemens assisted the prosecution team. They conclude, not surprisingly, that military justice was served by the criminal convictions of 11 low-ranking soldiers and the nonjudicial punishment of a handful of officers.
WorldNetDaily has commented on the recent memorandum issued by the Article 32, UCMJ, IO in LTC Lakin’s case.
But Lakin said the result "makes it impossible for me to have a fair hearing."
"I cannot even raise the issue of the president’s eligibility, on the grounds that my position has ‘no basis in law,’" he said
Navy Times reports that:
An active-duty Seabee is wanted for questioning in the slaying of his pregnant wife, authorities said.
Steelworker First Class (SCW) Eric Gilford, 31, disappeared after his wife, Kristine, was found stabbed to death May 26 in a residence in the Chicago suburb of Villa Park, Illinois authorities said.
Army Times reports that:
Experts say Fort Bragg likely violated the First Amendment when it sought to prohibit reporters from identifying accusers at a soldier’s arraignment.
The Observer doesn’t publish names of victims of sexual crimes. But Pernell faces charges other than sex crimes.
Thanks to safeguardourconstitution.com we have the Article 32, UCMJ, IO’s written ruling on several matters in LTC Lakin’s case.
Note, “the Army” did not refuse the defense requests. The IO did, acting in his role assigned under Article 32, UCMJ, and R.C.M. 405. This is what I would have expected MAJ Kemkes, the military defense counsel to have told LTC Larkin, and by inference, Mr. Jensen.
FayObserver reports that:
A Fort Bragg soldier accused of rape and break-ins on post, as well as in Cumberland County, is due in court Wednesday for an arraignment hearing.
Aaron M. Pernell, 22, of Tulsa, Okla., is charged by the military with two counts of rape, one count of attempted rape, one count of assault consummated by battery, two counts of burglary and one count of housebreaking, according to a release from the 82nd Airborne Division.
MySA news reports that:
Defense attorneys for Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, a Fort Hood psychiatrist charged with killing 13 people and wounding 32 others in a mass shooting here last fall, won a four-month delay Tuesday in an evidentiary hearing that could lead to his court-martial.
Sitting in the same courtroom where he oversaw proceedings for two infamous Abu Ghraib defendants, Col. James Pohl ruled in favor of the defense, which said it had not received all the documents it needed – including a ballistic trajectory report now being done by the FBI in Quantico, Va.
There are two decisions issued today of some relevance to military justice practitioners. One relates to Miranda and another to SORNA.
As to Berghuis v. Thompkins, Kent Scheidegger of crimeandconsequences blog says:
The Miranda rule remains intact in that the police must warn suspects of their rights and that an invocation of those rights by the suspect requires the police to stop questioning. Today’s decision involves what is needed to establish whether a suspect invoked or waived his rights.
Court-Martial Trial Practice Blog
