Sunday, March 08, 2009

This week in military justice -- 8 March 2009 edition

This week at the Supreme Court: The deadline for the Solicitor General's reply brief in Denedo is Wednesday. We'll post a copy once we get access to it.

This week at CAAF: No oral arguments are scheduled at CAAF this week.

This week at the CCAs: AFCCA will hear an oral argument tomorrow in a self-incrim case. The issue in United States v. Cahall, No. ACM S31458, is "WHETHER APPELLANT'S STATEMENTS TO AFOSI SHOULD HAVE BEEN SUPPRESSED WHEN THEY FOLLOWED HIS INVOCATION OF HIS RIGHTS TO REMAIN SILENT AND TO CONSULT AN ATTORNEY AND HIS REQUESTS WERE NOT 'SCRUPULOUSLY HONORED.'"

This week at the court-martial trial level: A ruling is expected tomorrow on the defense's motion for mistrial due to a Brady violation in United States v. Behenna, which resulted in an unpremeditated murder conviction and 25-year sentence last week.

2 comments:

NBM3 said...

Question: Is the U.S. military required to comply with Article 36, Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (“VCCR”) in the notification to a servicemember who is a non-U.S. citizen “the right to consular notification and access” upon arrest, detention or having charges preferred under the UCMJ? I note that in the case of Denedo (now pending before SCOTUS) that he was not a U.S. citizen and as such I’m curious as to whether Article 36 of the VCCR applied to him.

Anonymous said...

NBM3 - yes, but failure to do so does not provide relief as this is seen as a procedural error.