County authorities have dismissed charges and turned over to the Air Force their investigation of an airman accused of fatally shooting a buddy during a game of “Trust” at an off-base apartment.
Air Force Times reports., that there will be a court-martial instead of a civilian trial.
Fifty State Survey of Adult Sex Offender Registration Laws
Brenda V. Smith
American University – Washington College of Law; American University – NIC/WCL Project on Addressing Prison Rape
August 1, 2009Abstract:
This publication is part of a larger scholarly project and one in a series that aims to create a “legal toolkit” for addressing sexual violence in custody. This chart catalogues statutes that address adult sex offender registration requirements in all fifty states, as well as surrounding territories. This chart provides a list of all registrable offenses; indicates whether sex offender registration is required for staff sexual misconduct; details the type of information maintained in the sex offender registry, community notification and other websites; identifies limitations on residency or employment; and identifies the duration of registration.
Jenny Roberts, Ignorance Is Effectively Bliss: Collateral Consequences, Silence, and Misinformation in the Guilty-Plea Process, 95 IOWA L. R. 119 (2009).
ABSTRACT: In the 2009–2010 term, the U.S. Supreme Court will decide if it matters whether a criminal defense lawyer correctly counsels a client about the fact that the client faces deportation as a result of a guilty plea. Under prevailing constitutional norms in almost every jurisdiction, a lawyer does not have a duty to tell her client about many serious but “collateral” consequences of a guilty plea. Yet, in every jurisdiction that has considered the issue, that very same lawyer will run afoul of her duties if she affirmatively misrepresents a collateral consequence—every jurisdiction, that is, except Kentucky. The Supreme Court of Kentucky recently held that when there is no duty to warn about a consequence because it is collateral, misadvice about that same consequence is not a constitutional violation.
The collision of the collateral-consequences rule, which imposes no duty to warn, and the affirmative-misadvice exception, which imposes a duty to give accurate advice where a lawyer chooses to warn, leads to a perverse incentive structure that signals to defense lawyers (as well as to prosecutors and judges) that it is safest to say nothing at all about “collateral” matters. The Kentucky approach that the Supreme Court will review is equally troubling; it allows false information with no sanction or remedy. A cluttered and contradictory jurisprudence of informational rights in the guilty-plea process sits at this intersection of the collateral-consequences rule and affirmative-misadvice exception.
So-called collateral consequences often overshadow the direct penal sentences in criminal cases. In addition to deportation, courts categorize many other severe consequences as collateral, including involuntary civil commitment, sex-offender registration, and loss of the right to vote, to obtain professional licenses, and to receive public housing and benefits. These consequences touch upon every important area of a convicted person’s life—for the rest of his or her life. They also matter enormously in the United States, which has more than 600,000 individuals exiting the prison system and millions more getting criminal records each year. These individuals enter a society that is struggling to find ways to integrate them despite facing considerable obstacles.
Here is a link to today’s oral argument in Briscoe v. Virginia, the post Crawford and Melendez-Diaz case.
While I’m not convinced the decision will have much meaning in military cases, there are others who believe it will. So it does behoove us to monitor the case.
Sentencing Law & Policy (an excellent site) has this post which may be of some interest to those dealing with post-confinement issues.
The Third Circuit has today issued an interesting opinion concerning supervised release conditions for a repeat sex offender. The ruling in US v. Heckman, No. 08-3844 (3d Cir. Jan. 11, 2010) (available here), gets started this way:
Arthur William Heckman was indicted and pled guilty to one count of transporting child pornography, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(1). He was sentenced to 180 months’ imprisonment, followed by a lifetime term of supervised release. On appeal, Heckman challenges three “Special Conditions of Supervision” imposed by the District Court for the remainder of Heckman’s life: 1) an unconditional ban on Internet access; 2) a requirement that he participate in a mental health program; and 3) a restriction on any interaction with minors. While we affirm the mental health condition, we vacate the other challenged conditions and remand for resentencing consistent with this opinion.
A military judge has decided to move the trial for one of three Navy SEALs accused in connection with the alleged assault of a suspected terrorist to Iraq.
Cmdr. Tierney Carlos, the trial judge for the court-martial of Special Warfare Operator 2nd Class (SEAL) Jonathan Elliot Keefe, has agreed with defense motions to move the April 6 trial to Camp Victory in Iraq so Keefe can face the alleged victim, Ahmed Hashim Abed, whom the government sought to depose in lieu of a trial appearance.
“If he is available for a deposition, then he is available for trial,” Carlos said.
Here is an interesting piece relevant to a pending court-martial?
Tim King, The Fragging of American Officers: Historic Problems and Future Planning, Salem-News.com.
What we call fragging the British Navy called "Shot Rolling" after the practice of rolling a cannon ball across the deck for the purpose of injuring an officer. The methods may vary but the results are the same.
Whether Robert White was injured in Iraq in 2005 and deserved a Purple Heart makes no difference now.
The chief hospital corpsman wore the award without receiving it through official channels, and in the Navy’s eyes, that makes him a faker.
Marine Corps Times reports.
Every so often the comes up of impeachment by prior conviction under Mil. R. Evid. 609. The reminder is that:
The fact of a pending appeal does not defeat admission, but it may be brought up and discussed. Mil. R. Evid. 609(e).
A summary court-martial may not be used to impeach under this rule. There may be other ways to impeach with conduct subject to discipline at a summary court-martial, but not Mil. R. Evid. 609. (Further evidence that an SCM is not considered a “conviction?”)
The Killeen Daily Herald reports that LTG Cone recently gave a briefing about “behavioral health care.”
The Army is behind Fort Hood’s effort to address behavioral health care issues and plans to institute it across the board, the post’s commander said Friday.
In response to incidents like the Nov. 5 shooting and an Army-wide increase in suicides, Fort Hood officials implemented the Behavioral Health Care Plan, a two-year process which is set to undergo periodic reviews and leverage the "whole of community" to accomplish tasks in several phases, Cone said. The goal is to make sure everyone who needs behavioral health care is reached and that its capabilities and capacities are right for Fort Hood’s soldiers, families and the civilian workforce.
Cone also talked about a Recovery and Resiliency Task Force, part of which includes a comprehensive approach to identify, diagnose and holistically treat those impacted by events like the Nov. 5 shooting at the post’s Soldier Readiness Processing Center where 13 were killed and more than 30 were wounded when a gunman opened fire.
During the briefing apparently the following was said about Major Hasan and his pending court-martial issues.
Court-Martial Trial Practice Blog