United States v. Maliwat

76 M.J. 128, 2017 CAAF LEXIS 116
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces
DecidedFebruary 14, 2017
DocketNo. 16-0155/AF
StatusPublished

This text of 76 M.J. 128 (United States v. Maliwat) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Maliwat, 76 M.J. 128, 2017 CAAF LEXIS 116 (Ark. 2017).

Opinion

CCA 38579. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the following issue:

WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE ABUSED HIS DISCRETION BY PROVIDING THE PROPENSITY INSTRUCTION UNDER MILITARY RULE OF EVIDENCE 413 AFTER FAILING TO PERFORM THE REQUIRED ANALYSIS ON THE RECORD AND AFTER THE GOVERNMENT FAILED TO PROVIDE THE REQUIRED NOTICE OF ITS INTENT TO ARGUE PROPENSITY.

The decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals is set aside. The record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Air Force for remand to that court for reconsideration of the granted issue in light of United States v. Hills, 75 M.J. 350 (C.A.A.F. 2016).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. Hills
75 M.J. 350 (Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, 2016)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
76 M.J. 128, 2017 CAAF LEXIS 116, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-maliwat-armfor-2017.