United States v. Bartlett, __ M.J. ___, No. 07-0636/AR (C.A.A.F. Jan. 29, 2008): WHETHER THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY'S DECISION TO EXEMPT FROM COURT-MARTIAL SERVICE OFFICERS OF THE SPECIAL BRANCHES NAMED IN AR 27-10 CONTRADICTS ARTICLE 25 (d) (2), UCMJ, WHICH REQUIRES A CONVENING AUTHORITY TO SELECT COURT-MARTIAL MEMBERS BASED UPON AGE, EDUCATION, TRAINING, EXPERIENCE, LENGTH OF SERVICE, AND JUDICIAL TEMPERAMENT.
As anyone who has been on the defense, or government, side of a court-martial knows, doctors are always portrayed as the most defense friendly members. I wonder if anyone has argued that pop psychology in a brief in Bartlett?
The other discusses evidence admitted as a result of an illegal search of a government laptop, and relates to our discussion of military computer policy:
United States v. Rutherford, __ M.J. ___, No. 07-0795/AF (C.A.A.F. Jan. 29, 2008): WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE ERRED BY ADMITTING EVIDENCE AT TRIAL THAT WAS OBTAINED AS A DIRECT RESULT OF AN ILLEGAL SEARCH OF APPELLANT'S GOVERNMENT ISSUED LAPTOP COMPUTER.