United States v. Stewart

70 M.J. 331, 2011 CAAF LEXIS 671
Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces·Decided August 10, 2011·No. No. 11-0440/MC·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

CCA 201000021. Review granted on the following issues:

I. UNDER UNITED STATES v. PRATHER, IS IT LEGALLY POSSIBLE FOR THE PROSECUTION TO DISPROVE AN AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT ONCE THE MILITARY JUDGE HAS DETERMINED THAT THE DEFENSE HAS BEEN PROVED BY A PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE AND, IF NOT, IS THE MILITARY JUDGE REQUIRED TO ENTER A FINDING OF NOT GUILTY IN SUCH A CASE UNDER RCM 917?
II. WHETHER THE NAVY-MARINE CORPS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS ERRED IN FINDING THE EVIDENCE FACTUALLY SUFFICIENT BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT TO SUSTAIN APPELLANT’S CONVICTION UNDER SPECIFICATION 2 BECAUSE IN DOING SO IT (1) VIOLATED THE PRATHER LEGAL-IMPOSSIBILITY PRINCIPLE AND (2) IMPERMISSIBLY FOUND AS FACTS ALLEGATIONS THAT HE WAS FOUND NOT GUILTY OF IN SPECIFICATION 1.
[332] III. WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE COMMITTED PREJUDICIAL ERROR BY REQUIRING THE DEFENSE TO PRESENT EVIDENCE ON THE DEFENSE OF CONSENT AT AN ARTICLE 39(a) SESSION PRIOR TO TRIAL.

Briefs will be filed under Rule 25.

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

United States v. Stewart, 70 M.J. 331, 2011 CAAF LEXIS 671 (Ark. 2011).

70 M.J. 331 (United States v. Stewart) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

United States v. Stewart
71 M.J. 38 (Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, 2012)