CAAFlog
  • Home

CAAFlog

UCMJ art. 62

3/8/2022

4 Comments

 
Will the government appeal the MJ's post-trial grant of a mistrial in United States v. Edwards? The findings and conclusions certainly seem defensible and as the MJ notes at the end, a retrial is allowed.

It seems the evidence developed that one of the members may not have been completely candid on voir dire.
When there is a question about a juror’s or member’s fairness and impartiality, the civilian and military appellate courts have made it clear that, when determining whether to grant a mistrial, the trial courts must consider the “appearance of fairness” and the public’s “perception” of the process.  Commisso, 76 M.J. at 321. 

     a.  This Court harbors no doubt that if members of the public learned that a member made statements similar to those made by LTC JK at the open door meeting, then that would negatively impact the public’s perception of the fairness and impartiality of the court-martial.  In other words, a member’s statement that the convening authority put him on the panel because he “gets things done” would undermine an informed public’s confidence of that member’s objectivity as a court member and the fairness of the trial itself. 

     b.  When making this finding, the Court need not speculate on this issue.  When asked about his perception of the fairness and impartiality of this court-martial if a panel member said the things attributed to LTC JK, SFC BK credibly, bluntly, and astutely testified, “That wouldn’t seem fair to me.  It’d be like playing cards and the dealer has stacked the deck,” or words to this effect. 
No. 22-0052/AR. U.S. v. Samuel B. Badders. CCA 20200735. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals on appeal by the United States under Article 62, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 862 (2018), it is ordered that said petition is granted on the following issue:
 
WHETHER THE ARMY COURT HAD JURISDICTION OVER THIS GOVERNMENT APPEAL OF THE MILITARY JUDGE'S POST-TRIAL ORDER GRANTING A MISTRIAL.

​ACCA decision here. Post-trial, the military judge granted a mistrial and the government appealed. 
​
Tuesday, March 29, 2022
9:30 a.m.: United States v. Samuel B. BaddersNo. 22-0052/AR
(Appellee)(Appellant)Counsel for Appellant: Terry Zimmerman, Esq. (supplement)
                                                    ---------------------------- (reply)

Counsel for Appellee:  CAPT Dustin Morgan, JA, USA (answer)
Case Summary: GCM conviction of sexual assault. Granted issue questions whether the Army Court had jurisdiction over this government appeal of the military judge's post-trial order granting a mistrial.
4 Comments
Concerned Citizen
3/5/2022 11:37:48 am

Seems like the military judge got it right.

Interesting that CAAF will be hearing Badders later this month on whether or not ACCA would have jurisdiction over a mistrial under Article 62.

Reply
Robert Lyons
3/5/2022 06:38:04 pm


From a Chaplain perspective, who has known many Battalion Commanders. A likely scenario. The BN Commander told the truth during Voir Dier. As a lowly BN commander, he likely did not have much visibility with the CG. But with a troubled Sergeant in front of him, he could play the role of being a great and grandiose bad a**, scaring the young Sergeant by claiming how many courts martial he was on, how the CG placed him on them to get the job done, and what the poor Sergeant faced. But, when it came to sworn statements about his alleged behavior, he could not really admit to bullying his Soldier, because he would be admitting to being unfit for command, which, imho, he was.

Reply
Philip D. Cave link
3/6/2022 07:23:02 am

I wonder if the LTC has formed a closer relationship with the CG recently? Perhaps to discuss the situational choices.

Reply
LT Weinberg
3/6/2022 02:16:44 pm

Credit to trial defense counsel for making a record in void dire with a good line of questioning for the LTC.

Without that, I'm not sure that the LTC's later comments, however imprudent, results in relief in this case.

Reply

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.


Leave a Reply.

    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Links
    CAAF
    -Daily Journal
    -Current Term Opinions
    ACCA
    AFCCA
    CGCCA
    NMCCA
    Joint R. App. Pro.
    Global MJ Reform
    LOC Mil. Law
    Army Lawyer
    Resources

    Categories

    All
    Daily Journal
    MJ Reform
    Question Time
    Scholarship
    Top Of The Year 2021
    Unanimous
    Week In Review

    Archives

    April 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    November 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020

The views expressed on this website are expressed in the authors' personal capacities.
Proudly powered by Weebly
  • Home