112 January 2023.
No. 23-0001/AR. U.S. v. Cameron M. Mays. CCA 20200623. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the following issue: WHETHER THE OFFENSE OF INDECENT VIEWING UNDER ARTICLE 120c, UCMJ, INCLUDES VIEWING A VISUAL IMAGE OF THE PRIVATE AREA OF ANOTHER PERSON. Remember him? An officer was sentenced Sunday to dismissal from the Army but no time in prison after being found guilty of attempting to sexually assault a teenage family member while visiting Disneyland Paris three years ago. [The prosecution had called for up to a five-year prison sentence.] Sua sponte the MJ Pritchard described the verdicts as “inconsistent” after the jury announced them Saturday. The MJ imposed the mandatory dismissal; which is good because otherwise he wouldn't have any appeal.
By now we should all be aware that the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces has granted a number of petitions challenging the civilian confinement conditions at facilities used to house Air Force prisoners. For example, No. 22-0280/AF. U.S. v. D'Andre M. Johnson. CCA 39676. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the following issue: A new GAO Report to Congressional Committees suggests the problem may not be limited to civilian facilities but includes Air Force Military Confinement Facilities (MCF) (as well as the Marine Corps). MILITARY CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES: Consistent Application of Standards and Improved Oversight Could Enhance Health and Safety. GAO-23-105082, 22 December 2022. From the introduction, The Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) and the military departments have developed health and safety standards for military correctional facilities (MCFs). However, GAO found that the Air Force does not routinely assess its MCFs for adherence to these standards. Specifically, it is the only service that has not · "The military justice system was designed to maintain good order and discipline, strengthen national security, and achieve justice. After military leaders failed to effectively address the sexual assault crisis within the armed forces, Congress lost faith in this system. In response, Congress enacted sweeping legislative reform, transferring prosecutorial discretion for the most serious offenses from commanders to military lawyers. Unlike civilian prosecutions, most decisions within the military justice system have overwhelmingly favored one consideration: maintaining good order and discipline in the unit. While Congress’s reforms change who makes the decisions in many cases, they will have little effect unless military leaders also broaden the underlying criteria upon which their recommendations and decisions are made.
This Article proposes an innovative framework to assist military leaders in implementing a holistic approach to decision-making. Borrowing from the law of armed conflict, we propose a test that empowers decision makers to consider all the federal principles of prosecution and sentencing that Congress has repeatedly indicated should serve as touchstones for reform. When employing this framework, military justice decision makers will better account for the long-term impact on accused service members, society, and victims rather than solely focus on short-term deterrence within the unit. This proposal attempts to bring military prosecutions more in line with the criteria applied by civilian federal prosecutors and restore credibility in the military justice system, thereby enabling it to continue to do what it was designed to do." Read the full article here. “The more things change, the more they stay the same” is how I characterized the state of the military death penalty more than four years ago. Global Military Justice Reform: Death row SITREP (globalmjreform.blogspot.com). As 2022 draws to a close, that description remains apt. Ronald Gray has been a military death row inmate longer than anyone. He was sentenced to death on April 12, 1988, for a series of murders and rapes in the Fort Bragg area. On July 28, 2008, President George W. Bush approved his death sentence – the only time a President has approved a military death sentence since the Eisenhower administration. Gray currently has a habeas petition pending in the United States District Court for the District of Kansas. That petition has been stayed since March 2022 as the court and the parties await rulings from the 10th Circuit in two cases that could provide guidance concerning Article III courts’ scope of review when considering collateral attacks to court-martial proceedings. Those two cases--Santucci (20-3149) and Bales (20-3167)—were each argued in September 2021, so decisions could be imminent. Hasan Akbar has been Gray’s neighbor the longest. Akbar was sentenced to death in 2005 for two specifications of premeditated murder and three specifications of attempted premeditated murder on March 22, 2003, when he attacked members of the 101st Airborne Division as they prepared to invade Iraq. SCOTUS denied his cert petition in 2005, making the case ripe for presidential action. (In the military justice system, the president must take the affirmative step of approving a death sentence to allow it to be carried out. UCMJ art. 57(a)(3), 10 U.S.C. § 857(a)(3). As Gray’s case demonstrates, however, even after presidential action, there will likely be a long delay before an execution actually occurs—if one ever does.) Master Sergeant Timothy Hennis, U.S. Army (Ret.), arrived on military death row in 2010, having been sentenced to death by a court-martial for three murders in 1985 for which he was originally convicted and sentenced to death in a North Carolina state court and then, following the North Carolina Supreme Court’s reversal on evidentiary grounds, acquitted. SCOTUS denied cert in 2021, making the case ripe for presidential action. It may be the most interesting case in the history of military justice. The most recent arrival on military death row is Major Nidal Hasan, who was sentenced to death in 2013 for 13 specifications of premeditated murder and 32 specifications of attempted murder arising from his 2009 attack against personnel at Fort Hood. ACCA affirmed the death sentence in 2020. United States v. Hasan, 80 M.J. 682 (A. Ct. Crim. App. 2020) (en banc). The case is currently being briefed at CAAF; appellant’s reply brief is due on Jan. 3, 2023. An oral argument during calendar year 2023 seems likely. No U.S. military execution has occurred since April 13, 1961. Plus ça change . . . . Dwight Sullivan[Disclaimer: The views presented are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of DoD or its components; they are made in the author’s personal capacity and should not be imputed to anyone else.] Ramos is "retroactive."[1] Yes, that is what the highest court in Oregon concludes in Watkins v. Ackley, under Oregon law.
[1] See footnote 2 discussing why the term retroactive is misleading. We have posted before about Presidential Pardons and military persons (mostly former) getting one. Today, President Biden pardoned one servicemember convicted at court-martial. What is interesting is he served on active duty after his conviction. Some of us remember when there was a Return-to-Duty program that was used and mostly worked. Vincente Ray Flores-Air Force-Reduction in rank to grade E-3 (as amended); forfeiture of $700 pay per month for four months; confinement for four months, suspended for participation in the Air Force Return to Duty Program (May 16, 2008) Wrongfully using 3,4 methylenedioxymethmaphetamine; underage drinking. CNN reports that Vincente Ray Flores was court martialed when he was around 19 for consuming ecstasy and alcohol while serving in the military. After being sentenced to four months confinement, he participated in a return-to-duty program and remains on active duty, earning various honors from the military. Why care about Wisconsin v. Bowers? The Appellant, a police officer, created a DropBox account using his police department email address--duh. He then used the DropBox to transfer documents or give access to specific folders to others--sharing. He then put police reports of several murder investigations into the folders for others to have access to. The police were not happy that the investigations fell into the wrong hands and soon learned about the DropBox account. Because it was an "official account" the IT folks simply accessed the DropBox account. When the went to log in they arlready had the email address so all they had to do was click "forgot password" and whamo--they get to reset the password. Apparently Bowers wasn't using 2FA--duh. Having gotten access, the IT folks and the prosecutor soon found what they were looking for. But, not so fast, the search was all done without a warrant. That's why Bowers is an interesting case to read about a reasonable expectation of privacy in a DropBox account where there is sharing. The critical word saving Bower on appeal is "password." Cheers.And may you be having fair winds and following seas for 2023. Military Justice Reform: The Next Twenty Years |
Disclaimer: Posts are the authors' personal opinions and do not reflect the position of any organization or government agency.
Co-editors:
Phil Cave Brenner Fissell Links
SCOTUS CAAF -Daily Journal -2024 Ops ACCA AFCCA CGCCA NMCCA JRAP JRTP UCMJ Amendments to UCMJ Since 1950 (2024 ed.) Amendments to RCM Since 1984 (2024 ed.) Amendments to MRE Since 1984 (2024 ed.) MCM 2024 MCM 2023 MCM 2019 MCM 2016 MCM 2012 MCM 1995 UMCJ History Global Reform Army Lawyer JAG Reporter Army Crim. L. Deskbook J. App. Prac. & Pro. CAAFlog 1.0 CAAFlog 2.0 Archives
July 2024
Categories
All
|