PRESIDENT TRUMP TO USE U.S. MILITARY & FEDERAL ACT TO OUST ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS AT BORDER

It is no secret that the situation at any border center in America right now is tense. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) are accused daily of mishandling the influx of undocumented immigrants and asylum seekers. On the other hand, many politicians are feeling the pressure for not doing … Read more

U.S. V. SCHLOFF AUTHORIZED REVERSED CONVICTION AFTER UNLAWFUL COMMAND INFLUENCE JEOPARDIZES FINDINGS

In United States v. Schloff, 74 M.J. 312 (CAAF 2015), the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF) maintained the definitions of sexual contact in military criminal justice settings. In particular, it held sexual contact described in Article 120(g)(2) can be defined by body-to-body contact and/or object-to-body contact. Perhaps more importantly, though, it and the Army Criminal … Read more

AIR FORCE CCA DECISION MAY FORBID USE OF OLD PRESCRIPTION MEDICATION

The Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals (CCA) has recently overruled a decision in United States v. Lancaster that removed punishment from using prescription drugs for any purpose other than the treatment of the illness or injury for which they were originally prescribed by a physician. The new statement labels the previous decision as “erroneous” and “contrary” … Read more

CONFLICTS OF INTERESTS IN U.S. V. HALE CAUSE CONVICTION REVERSAL

The Navy-Marine Corps Criminal Court of Appeals (NMCCA) has reversed multiple serious crime convictions, including rape and kidnapping, following a thorough review of United States v. Hale. The reversal of these convictions has also halted a 26-year confinement sentencing. After it was found that there was significant conflicts of interests among three parties in the case, … Read more

CAAF DECISION GIVES CCA POWER TO DISAPPROVE MANDATORY MINIMUM PUNITIVE DISCHARGE

The United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF) has presented its decision for United States v Kelly. The CAAF’s opinion has held that a Court of Criminal Appeals (CCA) has the legal ability to disapprove a mandatory minimum punitive discharge when the penalty would be “inappropriately severe.” The decision has creates the potential … Read more

MORE CHARGES BROUGHT FORWARD FOR SAILOR’S HOMICIDE

More charges have been brought forward in the tragic homicide case of a navy petty officer stationed in Germany. A solider is facing trial on October 14, 2014 on charges of making a false official statement and helping to conceal a crime. The soldier is a known friend of an Air Force staff sergeant who … Read more

Categories All

4TH AMENDMENT VIOLATION CAUSES REVERSAL OF US V. DARNELL

The Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF) has reversed the ruling of the Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals (CCA) that originally upheld a conviction in United States v. Darnall. The CAAF found no substantial evidence for Darnall to have ever been detained and questioned by investigators, which poses a direct violation of the … Read more

UNITED STATES V. PEASE RESULTS IN LANDMARK CONSENT DECISION

Last month, the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces made its final ruling on United States v. Jacob L. Pease, Information Systems Technician Second Class, United States Navy. Pease was initially accused and convicted of three specifications of sexual assault and one charge of abusive sexual contact but, upon appeal, those verdicts … Read more

Categories All

SUPPRESSION RULING IN U.S. V. LEWIS REVERSED, CAAF AFFIRMS DECISION

In an interesting development in the Army case of U.S. v. Lewis, the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF) has decided to affirm the Army Court of Criminal Appeal’s (CCA) partial reversal of a lower court’s suppression ruling.  Specifically, one out of three suppressed statements from the defendant has lost the suppression ruling’s protection … Read more

COURT RULES THAT SELF-INCRIMINATION DID NOT RESULT IN FOURTH AMENDMENT VIOLATION

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals recently ruled on a very sensitive Fourth Amendment matter in the case of United States v. Montgomery, in which the court considered a claim of illegal search and seizure. The federal judges provided an incisive interpretation of these constitutional rights and offered invaluable insight for both civilian and military … Read more