court-martial Tag Archives — Page 26 of 60 — Court-Martial Trial Practice Blog

Sex offender registration (updated)

May 13, 2010 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

There’s been lots of litigation about SORNA. But now, courtesy of Sentencing Law & Policy we learn that DOJ has some recommendations for amending SORNA.

You will be interested to know that this morning the U.S. Department of Justice issued proposed supplemental guidelines modifying several requirements for compliance with SORNA. Many address concerns raised by the states and other stakeholders. They do the following:

Gives jurisdictions discretion to exempt juvenile offenders from public website posting

Provides information concerning the review process for determining that jurisdictions have substantially implemented

Gives jurisdictions discretion to modify the retroactive registration requirement to apply to new felony convictions only

Provides mechanisms for newly recognized tribes to elect whether to become SORNA registration jurisdictions and to implement SORNA

Expands required registration information to include the forms signed by sex offenders acknowledging that they were advised of their registration obligations

Requires jurisdictions to exempt sex offenders’ e-mail addresses and other Internet identifiers from public website posting

Requires jurisdictions to have sex offenders report international travel 21 days in advance

Clarifies mechanism for interjurisdictional information sharing and tracking.

(update) Here is a link to the 14 May 2010 entry in the Federal Register.

LTC Lakin’s contumacy

May 13, 2010 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

safeguardourconstitution reports that: “Obama Administration unleashes Army lawyers instead of releasing birth certificate.” This is shameful hyperbole and utterly incorrect.

LTC Lakin is alleged to have committed offenses in violation of the UCMJ. The conduct alleged cuts to the very heart of military requirements of obedience to orders, fidelity to the oath of office, and the need for seniors to set the example. I’m reliably informed that in addition to formal counselings every effort was made pre-preferral to convince LTC Lakin to obey his orders. In the face of such contumacious behavior the Army had no choice but to prefer charges. Enlisted personnel are regularly disciplined, court-martialed, and jailed for the same or similar conduct and who have better reasons for their AWOL. Such a stunning lack of officership cannot pass unnoticed or undisciplined. Neither President Obama nor his administration has any role in this case at all. Should the administration try to get involved they should be told – politely – to butt out.

LTC Lakin update

May 12, 2010 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

Safeguardourconstitution reports that the Article 32, UCMJ, hearing is scheduled for 11 June 2010.

The report links to a letter to MAJ Kemkes (a great TDS lawyer from Fort Myer) granting a delay of the hearing from 6 May to 11 June.

approval_of_delay_for_art32_hearing

LTC Driscoll, a lawyer, is the IO. The use of non-lawyers as IO is pretty standard within the Army. Thanx CAAFLog for the update.

Hasan update 9

May 12, 2010 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

KVUE.com reports that:

The attorney representing the accused gunman in the 2009 Fort Hood shootings says the Army is holding back important evidence in the upcoming Article 32 hearing.

Attorney John Galligan says he needs court documents, including Major Nidal Hasan’s FBI files, to gain more insight into his mental state in the months leading up to the shooting.

Waiving appellate review

May 12, 2010 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

There has been quite a bit of discussion recently of waiving appellate review as part of a pretrial agreement.

Here is a timely article from the ABA about this important topic (thanks to Sentencing Law & Policy for the link).

Ellis & Bussert, Stemming the Tide of Postconviction Waivers, 25 (1) Crim. Justice, Spring 2010, ABA.

Collateral consequences – Sex Offender Registration

May 11, 2010 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

The advice to an accused about sexual offender registration is complicated. Cases such as Williams v. Lee and Keathley, No. ED 93827, from the Court of Appeals of Missouri, Eastern District, Division Five, decided May 4, 2010. This is a retroactivity case.

On February 5, 2000, Williams pled guilty in a military tribunal to one specification of carnal knowledge under Article 120 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice ("UCMJ"), and one specification of sodomy with a child under the age of 16 in violation of Article 125 of the UCMJ. No law — Missouri, federal, or military — required Williams to register as a sex offender at the time of his convictions.

However, with the passage of SORNA to police went out and required registration. But,

U. S. v. Roach-CAAF

May 10, 2010 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

United States v. Roach has been returned to AFCCA for a second time.

Initially the case was sent back because appellant’s case was decided before his counsel submitted a brief, and because the chief judge on his panel had made some public comments relating to the case.

This time the case goes back because the chief judge also recommended his temporary successor for the Roach case, thus violating the principal that a recused judge should have no further contact with the case.

Speedy trial

May 10, 2010 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

Allen v. United States Air Force, No. 08-3450 (8th Cir. 7 May 2010).

Joseph Allen served in the United States Air Force (Air Force) for more than twenty years, from January 14, 1985, until September 30, 2006, when he voluntarily retired and received an Honorable Discharge. During his service, on February 18, 2004, the Air Force initiated general court-martial proceedings against Allen, alleging that he took indecent liberties with a minor child and contributed to the delinquency of two minor children. The general court-martial trial began more than two years later, on March 21, 2006. Allen was convicted, and his sentence included a reduction in grade from Master Sergeant (E-7) to Senior Airman (E-4), significantly reducing his retirement benefits. Following the conviction, Allen filed a complaint against the Air Force and nineteen individuals in the District Court for the District of North Dakota, claiming that his Sixth Amendment speedy trial rights were violated. The district court^{[ 2 ]} granted the Air Force’s motion for summary judgment. Allen appeals, and for the following reasons, we affirm. Allen also moves to supplement the record, and we deny his motion.

Following his conviction, Allen requested that the court-martial’s findings and sentence be set aside and that the charge and specifications be dismissed because the military judge should have granted Allen’s motion to dismiss for violation of his speedy trial or due process rights. In a memorandum, the Director of the Air Force Judiciary, Colonel Roberta Moro, acting pursuant to Article 69 of the UCMJ, reviewed the record of the court-martial, determined that no relief was warranted and declined to send the case to the Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals because the court-martial’s findings and sentence were supported by law. On September 30, 2006, Allen voluntarily retired from the Air Force and received an Honorable Discharge.

A LTC Lakin piece

May 9, 2010 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

Blogger Rainier4311 has a piece on LTC Lakin which is critical of Anderson Cooper’s interview. Regardless of the merits of the interview, the piece contains some interesting and uninformed comments on the military legal system.

This Article 138 discovery process must be done. LTC Lakin now has the right to discovery based on the Articles of the UCMJ. The United States Army is attempting to prosecute LTC Lakin just to cover their tracks because the Army has put other personnel out because of their refusal to deploy because the erroneously accused wanted proof of Barack Obama’s eligibility to be president.

In all reason, the controversy surrounding Barack Obama’s eligibility must be put to bed. Under Article 138, he is bound by both federal laws to prove his birth, and since he is, by all accounts the Commander in Chief, he is also bound by the UCMJ.

Congressional action on forensic labs

May 9, 2010 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

The American Academy of Forensic Sciences has made some recommendations to Congress for legislation to reform forensic laboratories that obtain federal funds directly or through an organization (such as DoD) that receives federal funding.

Preliminary Outline of Draft Forensic Reform Legislation – 5/5/10.

Thanks GR.