tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34853720.post4379111616578166502..comments2023-08-24T10:39:23.460-04:00Comments on CAAFlog: New AFCCA published opinion on post-trial proceedingsDwight Sullivanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11657981110237418710noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34853720.post-76760627004829355402007-12-12T11:40:00.000-05:002007-12-12T11:40:00.000-05:00If you have access, the opinion is available at 20...If you have access, the opinion is available at 2007 CCA LEXIS 527.<BR/><BR/>I've been following this issue with interest since NMCCA's published opinions in Lepage, 59 M.J. 659 (2003) and Crain, 63 M.J. 607 (2006). <BR/><BR/>It seems to me that the trend is supporting a conclusion that trial judges have the same authority as NMCCA to fix any and all trial errors(save factual insufficiency, under Art. 66), provided the substantial rights of the accused are not materially prejudiced in the process.<BR/><BR/>Maybe it should become common practice to file a post-trial brief with the trial judge in every case with meritorious issues, requesting the alleged errors at trial be corrected expeditiously? <BR/><BR/>Or, tactically, is better to wait the years it takes for the service appellate courts/CAAF to give relief?<BR/><BR/>SDAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com