Recently in Military Category

New SCOTUS Criminal Cases

November 15, 2019 1:36 PM | Posted by Kent Scheidegger | No Comments
The U.S. Supreme Court issued a short orders list after its Friday conference today. The Court took up three criminal cases for full briefing and argument.

United States v. Briggs, No. 19-108 and United States v. Collins, No. 19-184 are military cases involving the statute of limitations for rape under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

Walker v. United States, No. 19-373, asks whether a Texas conviction for robbery can be a "violent felony" under the Armed Career Criminal Act when, at the time of Walker's prior conviction, that crime could be committed by theft plus reckless (not necessarily intentional) injury to another person.

A longer orders list with cases turned down and procedural orders will be released Monday.

Rape, the Military, Statutes of Limitation, and Coker v. Georgia

August 6, 2018 10:25 AM | Posted by Kent Scheidegger | No Comments
The title may sound like a hodgepodge of unrelated items, but they are all involved in a case that the U.S. Supreme Court sent back to the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF) today, Abdirahman v. U.S., No. 17-243.

Case 17-243 was a joint petition of 165 service members convicted of various offenses.  One of them, Lt. Col. Michael Briggs, was convicted in 2014 of a rape that occurred in 2005.

The military statute of limitations, 10 U.S.C. ยง 843 (UCMJ Art. 43), as it read in 2005, had (and still has) a general, "except as otherwise provided," limit of five years in subdivision (b)(1).  Subdivision (a) at the time read:

A person charged with absence without leave or missing movement in time of war, or with any offense punishable by death, may be tried and punished at any time without limitation.
Was rape an "offense punishable by death" under the UCMJ in 2005?
Continue reading Rape, the Military, Statutes of Limitation, and Coker v. Georgia.

Desertion and Consequences

March 27, 2015 12:58 PM | Posted by Kent Scheidegger | 2 Comments
AP has an article headlined, "Bergdahl Charged Despite Torture, Attempts to Escape Taliban" (italics added):

Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl says he was tortured repeatedly in the five years he was held captive by the Taliban: beaten with a copper cable, chained, held in a cage and threatened with execution after trying to escape.

Bergdahl described his captivity in a note his lawyer made public Thursday after sharing it with the Army in an attempt to avert a court martial.

The Army charged Bergdahl nevertheless on Wednesday, accusing him of desertion and misbehavior before the enemy for leaving his post in Afghanistan in June 2009.
Despite?  Nevertheless?  Is desertion any less desertion because it is followed by bad consequences for the deserter when the enemy he places himself in the hands of turns out to be (surprise, surprise) the enemy?

"Bergdahl's lawyer Eugene Fidell said the sergeant has already suffered more than enough."  Okay, consider that in sentencing, but he is still a deserter, and his military record needs to reflect that.
Continue reading Desertion and Consequences.
« Mental State | Main Index | Archives | National Security »

Search

Subscribe to feed Subscribe to this blog's feed

Subscribe to FULL feed Subscribe to FULL feed

Recent Entries

Monthly Archives