Criminal Law Department Presents

In this final part, we conclude our analysis of the CAAF's decision in United States v. Hasan. This episode addresses the SJA's role in providing Article 34 advice, ACCA's decision to not recuse itself, and MAJ Hasan's continued self representation during the post-trial phase. Connect with The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School on Facebook (tjaglcs), LinkedIn (tjaglcs), or visit our...

In this second of a three parts, we continue our analysis of the CAAF's decision in United States v. Hasan. This episode addresses whether the military judge has a duty to excuse a panel member for cause and the constitutionality of Article 45(b) of the UCMJ.Connect with The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School on Facebook (tjaglcs), LinkedIn (tjaglcs), or visit our website for more re...

In this first of a three parts, we examine the the CAAF's decision in United States v. Hasan. This episode addresses the history of this case, and explains the CAAF's opinion addressing MAJ Hasan's decision to represent himself and the Military Judge's decision to close a portion of the trial to the public. Connect with The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School on Facebook (tjaglcs), Li...

These two cases examine the CAAF’s jurisdiction when deciding on writs filed by SVCs. Specifically, the CAAF decides whether they have the authority to review decisions made by the CCA’s when asked by an accused, and by an SVC, respectively. Connect with The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School on Facebook (tjaglcs), LinkedIn (tjaglcs), or visit our website for more resources at https:...

In this case, CAAF considers whether courts-martial defendants have a right to a unanimous guilty verdict under the Sixth Amendment, the Fifth Amendment Due Process Clause, or the Fifth Amendment component of equal protection. Connect with The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School on Facebook (tjaglcs), LinkedIn (tjaglcs), or visit our website for more resources at https://tjaglcs.army....

This case clarifies what “viewing” means for purposes of Article 120c, Indecent Viewing. Specifically, CAAF considers whether “viewing” includes viewing a simultaneously created visual image of the private area of another person. Connect with The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School on Facebook (tjaglcs), LinkedIn (tjaglcs), or visit our website for more resources at https://tjaglcs.ar...

CAAF explores the appellant’s claims that he suffered cruel and unusual punishment under Article 55, UCMJ and the 8th Amendment during a period of post-trial confinement in a civilian jail. Connect with The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School on Facebook (tjaglcs), LinkedIn (tjaglcs), or visit our website for more resources at https://tjaglcs.army.mil/leapp You can also connect direct...

CAAF considers whether a military judge abused his discretion by failing to abide by the heightened plea inquiry where the charged offense implicated both criminal and constitutionally protected conduct. Connect with The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School on Facebook (tjaglcs), LinkedIn (tjaglcs), or visit our website for more resources at https://tjaglcs.army.mil/leapp You can also...

Military Judge Colonel Robert (Rob) Shuck provides advice for military justice practitioners in the field for improving their legal practice. Connect with The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School on Facebook (tjaglcs), LinkedIn (tjaglcs), or visit our website for more resources at https://tjaglcs.army.mil/leapp You can also connect directly with the Criminal Law Department on Facebook...

Both these cases explore the reasonableness of the Government’s search of an Accused’s cellular phone. CAAF looks at both the reasonableness of the methodologies of these searches and whether the exclusionary rule should be applied to evidence found during the searches of the cellular phones in these cases. Connect with The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School on Facebook (tjaglcs), Li...

In this case, CAAF consider an improper sentencing argument, specifically looking at and applying the test for prejudice from improper sentencing arguments. MAJ Dustin Morgan and LtCol David Segraves provide an overview of the case and key takeaways for military justice practitioners. Connect with The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School on Facebook (tjaglcs), LinkedIn (tjaglcs), or vi...

Colonel (Ret.) Larry Morris, the Chief of Staff/Counselor to the President of The Catholic University of America delivered the 50th Kenneth J. Hodson Lecture in Criminal Law to the 71st Graduate Course and the Staff and Faculty at The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School. He provided an historical and principled view on “Military Justice in Transition.” This was a special moment to hon...

This case clarifies the standard a military judge must utilize when crafting a remedy for a discovery violation under RCM 701(g)(3)(D). Although this is, at its core a statutory interpretation case, there are discovery lessons to be learned. MAJ Dustin Morgan and MAJ Josh Mikkelsen provide an overview of the case and key takeaways for military justice practitioners. Connect with The Judge Advocate...

In this narrow case, the CAAF looks at whether an adjudged reprimand was appropriate as written as part of its sentence appropriateness review under Article 66(d)(1), Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). Connect with The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School on Facebook (tjaglcs), LinkedIn (tjaglcs), or visit our website for more resources at https://tjaglcs.army.mil/leapp You can a...

Major Josh Mikkelsen, resident Sexual Assault Prevention and Response (SAPR) expert at The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School, shares with us what he considers to be the most significant SAPR updates in the last few years. This is an important episode for commanders and judge advocates advising commanders on SAPR issues. Here are some resources shared during the episode: Army Safe-to...

In this case, we explore the sentence appropriateness power of the CCAs. Connect with The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School on Facebook (tjaglcs), LinkedIn (tjaglcs), or visit our website for more resources at https://tjaglcs.army.mil/leapp You can also connect directly with the Criminal Law Department on Facebook (tjaglcs_crimlaw) or Instagram (tjaglcs_crimlaw)

To quote Chief Judge Ohlson directly “This case underscores the need for everyone involved in a court-martial to pay meticulous attention to the panel member selection process.” Connect with The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School on Facebook (tjaglcs), LinkedIn (tjaglcs), or visit our website for more resources at https://tjaglcs.army.mil/leapp You can also connect directly with the...

This case addresses the application of MRE 412 (prohibition of evidence of sexual behavior or disposition of a victim), but also may be seen as an explora-tion into the Abuse of Discretion standard that appellate courts apply to trial judge’s rulings on evidence. Connect with The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School on Face-book (tjaglcs), LinkedIn (tjaglcs), or visit our website for m...

This Art. 62 appeal reviews a military judge’s suppression of evidence found on the accused’s phone. Connect with The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School on Face-book (tjaglcs), LinkedIn (tjaglcs), or visit our website for more resources at https://tjaglcs.army.mil/leapp You can also connect directly with the Criminal Law Department on Facebook (tjaglcs_crimlaw) or Instagram (tjaglcs_...

This case is about remote live testimony of a child and the accused’s right to confrontation. Connect with us on Facebook (tjaglcs_crimlaw) or Instagram (tjaglcs_crimlaw)

In this case, the CAAF explores the use of an accused’s testimony from a prior trial under Military Rule of Evidence (M.R.E.) 801(d)(2) as an admission by a party opponent. Connect with us on Facebook (tjaglcs_crimlaw) or Instagram (tjaglcs_crimlaw)

This case is about whether attempted conspiracy is a viable offense under the UCMJ. We also discuss the concept of waiver. Connect with us on Facebook (tjaglcs_crimlaw) or Instagram (tjaglcs_crimlaw)

This case is about whether the Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals (AFCCA) erred in conducting their factual sufficiency review. Appellant alleges they required him to prove his mistake of fact defense with “direct evidence.” Connect with us on Facebook (tjaglcs_crimlaw) Connect with us on Instagram (tjaglcs_crimlaw)

This case is about whether the appellant voluntarily gave his cell phone password to criminal investigators.

This case analyzes the mandatory disclosure exception to the MRE 513 privilege.