Tuesday, October 31, 2006

Navy JAG certifies confrontation issue

The Judge Advocate General of the Navy has certified the following issue to CAAF:

WHETHER THE NAVY-MARINE CORPS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS ERRONEOUSLY HELD THAT THE MILITARY JUDGE ABUSED HIS DISCRETION BY FINDING THE 13-YEAR OLD WITNESS UNAVAILABLE ON THE BASIS OF MENTAL ILLNESS OR INFIRMITY, AND THUS THAT THE MILITARY JUDGE HAD ERRONEOUSLY ADMITTED THE WITNESS’ VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION.

The case is United States v. Cabrera-Frattini, No. 07-5001. The Navy-Marine Corps Court's unreported ruling is available at http://www.jag.navy.mil/NMCCA/CABRERA-FRATTINI%20J.R.%20200201665%20UNPUB.doc. The Navy-Marine Corps Court panel split 2-1, with Chief Judge Rolph writing a lengthy and thoughtful dissent.

--Dwight Sullivan

2 comments:

Jason Grover said...

Anybody notice the timeline? The case was decided 2 August 2006. Lexis does not indicate a motion for reconsideration and I couldn't find any previous mention of the case on the Daily Journal. Doesn't CAAF Rule 19(b)(3) require certificates for review to be filed no later than 30 days after the decision. Did the government really blow the deadline by so much? The government routinely files oppositions to petitions that are untimely.
Does CAAF even have the ability to refuse to hear an untimely government appeal in light of Article 67, which does not provide timelines for certificates?

No Man said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.