Zachary Spilman Attorney at Law 29 North Main Street #97, Sherborn, MA Toll free: 844-SPILMAN
|
|
- Dora Wood
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Zachary Spilman Attorney at Law 29 North Main Street #97, Sherborn, MA Toll free: 844-SPILMAN January 30, 2017 Joint Service Committee on Military Justice Docket ID DOD-2016-OS-0113 Department of Defense Office of the Deputy Chief Management Officer Directorate for Oversight and Compliance 4800 Mark Center Drive, Mailbox #24 Alexandria, VA To the Members of the Joint Service Committee on Military Justice: This correspondence is a public comment to the proposed changes to the Manual for Courts- Martial published in the Federal Register on November 29, 2016 (81 Fed. Reg ). The following matters are presented in this correspondence: 1. Disclaimer Public comment to proposed changes to the Manual for Courts-Martial:... 2 a. Do not eliminate appellate counsel s right to review the complete record of trial Suggested additional changes to the Manual for Courts-Martial:... 2 a. Clarify that Government counsel represents either the prosecution or the appellate government division, and not the Government at large b. Increase procedural protections for a person accused of contempt c. Limit the use of personal identifiers in court-martial documents d. Consider rules to address contemporaneous public access to court-martial documents e. Clarify the effect of a staff judge advocate s pretrial advice f. Require production of a privilege log when any entity that is represented by counsel asserts an evidentiary privilege g. Restrict the Government to the privileges contained in Military Rules of Evidence 505, 506, and h. Ensure consistency in prosecutions under Clause 1 and Clause 2 of Article
2 1. Disclaimer. This comment is submitted in my personal capacity. This comment does not speak for, and should not be imputed to, any other individual or any organization, agency, or entity. Nothing in this correspondence necessarily reflects the policy or position of any military service, the Department of Defense, the U.S. Government, or any one or more of my clients. 2. Public comment to proposed changes to the Manual for Courts-Martial: a. Do not eliminate appellate counsel s right to review the complete record of trial. Section 1, Paragraph O of the public notice proposes an amendment to Rule for Courts-Martial (R.C.M.) 1103A that will eliminate the existing right of appellate counsel to review the complete record of trial. This proposed amendment should be rejected, and R.C.M. 1103A should remain unchanged. There is no rational justification to allow appellate military judges to review the complete record of trial but not afford a similar right to appellate counsel (who may and often do outrank the judges themselves). Furthermore, protective orders issued by a court of criminal appeals or by CAAF are more than adequate to protect the privacy interests of victims, witnesses, and others whose private affairs may become part of a record of trial by court-martial. R.C.M. 1103A was established in 2005 and reflects the considered judgment of the President informed by the decisions of the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF) in United States v. Romano, 46 M.J. 269 (C.A.A.F. 1997), and United States v. Rivers, 49 M.J. 434 (C.A.A.F. 1998). There are no new circumstances that warrant upsetting this settled, functional, and practical rule. The proposed amendment should be rejected. 3. Suggested additional changes to the Manual for Courts-Martial: a. Clarify that Government counsel represents either the prosecution or the appellate government division, and not the Government at large. Part II of the Manual for Courts-Martial contains numerous references to the prosecution as a party to a court-martial. See R.C.M. 701(a)(2)(B), 701(a)(3)(A), 701(a)(5)(A), 703(a), 703(c)(1), 901(d)(1), 905(c)(2)(B), 907(b)(3)(B), 910(g)(2), 913(b), 913(c)(1)(A), 916(b)(1), 917(a), 917(d), 921(c)(4), 1001(a)(1), 1001(b), 1001(c)(1), 1001(c)(2)(A), 1001(c)(2)(C), 1001(d), 1001(g), 1001A(e), 1004(b)(1)(B), 1112(c), 1304(b)(2)(E)(ii). See also R.C.M. 704(d) (discussion), 801(e)(4) (discussion), 804(c)(2) (discussion), 806(b)(6) (discussion), 901(d)(3) (discussion), 905(g) (discussion), 907(b)(2)(B) (discussion), 910(a)(1) (discussion), 916(b)(3) (discussion), 918(c) (discussion), 919(b) (discussion), 920(e)(7) (discussion), 1210(f)(3) (discussion), 1301(f) (discussion). This designation conforms to the practice of the civil courts. Page 2 of 8
3 Common practice in courts-martial, however, is for trial counsel to refer to themselves as the Government. Considering the unique nature of a court-martial proceeding, where all participants are Government employees (and, in many cases, all or nearly all are commissioned officers), it is improper for trial counsel to refer to themselves as the Government. They are, and they should refer to themselves as, the prosecution. Furthermore, because the litigation positions of the appellate government divisions are not directed by a central authority, it is improper for counsel assigned to the appellate government divisions to refer to themselves as the Government. They are, and they should refer to themselves, as representatives of their respective appellate government division. Such reference would resolve the incongruity of CAAF s Rule 26(a) which permits the appellate government divisions to file amicus curiae briefs without invitation; if each division represents the Government, then this rule allows the Government to file an amicus curiae brief in support of itself. Accordingly, R.C.M. 103(16)(B) should be amended with a second sentence that states: Such counsel shall be referred to as the prosecution and not the Government. Additionally, R.C.M. 1202(b)(1) should be rewritten to state: (1) Appellate Government counsel. Appellate Government counsel shall represent the appellate government division to which assigned before the Court of Criminal Appeals or the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces when directed to do so by the Judge Advocate General concerned. Appellate Government counsel may represent the United States before the United States Supreme Court when requested to do so by the Attorney General. b. Increase procedural protections for a person accused of contempt. Congress amended Article 48 in the Ike Skelton National Defense Authorization Act for 2011, 124 Stat. 4137, 4218 (2011), expanding the definition of contempt punishable under Article 48 to include: willfully disobey[ing] the lawful writ, process, order, rule, decree, or command of the court-martial. Additional procedural protections for a person accused of contempt should accompany this Congressional expansion of the contempt power. Particularly, the ability of a court-martial to address contempt summarily (pursuant to Rule for Courts-Martial 809(b)) should be limited. A reasonable limitation would permit a court-martial acting summarily to issue no more than a finding of contempt without punishment. Additionally, this author is personally aware of instances where the contempt power was utilized by military judges within the Navy-Marine Corps Trial Judiciary during calendar year 2013 to Page 3 of 8
4 address conduct by judge advocates serving as detailed defense counsel. These instances involved the threat of contempt in response to minor procedural missteps by junior officers with relatively little legal experience. For instance, in one case a company grade military defense counsel was ordered to appear for a contempt hearing because she was less than five minutes late to an Article 39(a) session. In another case, an accused excused the presence at an Article 39(a) session of one of the two company grade military defense counsel detailed to the case, but the absent counsel was ordered to show cause why he should not be held in contempt because he inadvertently failed to file an advance notice of his absence in accordance with a local rule of practice. Such use of the contempt power in response to minor and unintentional transgressions by counsel is improper, borders on tyrannical and abusive, and reveals the need for guidance on the appropriate use of this expanded power. Accordingly, the following new paragraphs (1) and (2) within Rule for Courts-Martial 809(a) are respectfully proposed: (1) Use of the contempt power is limited to willful disobedience of the lawful writ, process, order, rule, decree, or command of the court-martial. Except in extraordinary circumstances, a specific warning shall be given to an alleged offender before any conduct may form the basis of a contempt proceeding under this rule. (2) Personnel of courts-martial, including counsel, shall not be subject to contempt proceedings for any conduct unless the alleged offender is given a warning describing with particularity the allegedly contemptuous conduct, is afforded a reasonable opportunity to comply with the warning, and willfully fails to comply with the warning. c. Limit the use of personal identifiers in court-martial documents. The use of certain personal information, such as social security numbers, the names of minors, dates of birth, financial account numbers, and home addresses is unnecessary to the administration of military justice and risks misuse of this information for improper purposes. Accordingly, the creation of a new rule for courts-martial to restrict the use of this data is advisable. The following text of a proposed rule is respectfully suggested: Rule 110. Use of personal information. All parties shall refrain from including, and shall redact as necessary, the following personal information from the charge sheet, allied papers, pleadings, exhibits, and other documents attached to the record of trial: social security numbers or any portion thereof, the names of minors, dates of birth, financial account numbers, and home addresses. Where omission or redaction would prejudice a Page 4 of 8
5 party, the military judge may order sealed any such matters or order other appropriate relief. d. Consider rules to address contemporaneous public access to court-martial documents. In 5504 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017, Pub. L (2016), Congress established Article 140a that will (when effective) require the Secretary of Defense to prescribe uniform standards and criteria for facilitation of public access to military justice case information. In advance of the effective date of this new statute, the Joint Service Committee on Military Justice should explore the development of uniform rules to enable greater public access to courtmartial documents at all stages (in addition to the above-discussed rule limiting the use of personal identifiers). Were the Joint Service Committee to hold public hearings to address the public s right to contemporaneous access to trial-stage court-martial documents, and to consider techniques to ensure the same, such hearings would likely attract a wide variety of insightful comments. Accordingly, it is respectfully recommended that the Joint Service Committee consider holding such hearings in the near future. e. Clarify the effect of a staff judge advocate s pretrial advice. In the Military Justice Act of 1983, 97 Stat. 1393, 1395 (1983), Congress delegated to a convening authority s staff judge advocate the responsibility to determine whether a specification is warranted by the evidence. This responsibility is contained in Article 34, which states in relevant part: The convening authority may not refer a specification under a charge to a general court-martial for trial unless he has been advised in writing by the staff judge advocate that... (2) the specification is warranted by the evidence... Rule for Courts-Martial 406(b)(2) restates this responsibility, requiring a staff judge advocate to provide a conclusion with respect to whether the allegation of each offense is warranted by the evidence... Additionally, Rule for Courts-Martial 601(d)(2)(B) requires that a convening authority receive this conclusion prior to referring any specification for trial by general courtmartial (unless the accused waives this requirement). However, Rule for Courts-Martial 601(d)(1) applies a disjunctive requirement for a finding of only reasonable grounds prior to referral, stating that if the convening authority finds or is advised by a judge advocate that there are reasonable grounds... (emphasis added), then the convening authority may refer the specification for trial. Page 5 of 8
6 Clarification of the effect of a staff judge advocate s pretrial advice is warranted. When Congress delegated to a staff judge advocate the responsibility to determine whether a specification is warranted, and established that determination as a necessary prerequisite to referral for trial by general court-martial, it intended to relieve commanders of the need to make complex legal judgments. H. Rep , at 14 (1983). Congress thereby provided a staff judge advocate with the authority to prevent trial by general court-martial where the staff judge advocate makes a legal conclusion that a specification is not warranted by the evidence. Moreover, Congress did not further define the term warranted, leaving its application to the sound legal judgment of a staff judge advocate. Rule for Courts-Martial 601(d) unnecessarily confuses this clear delegation of responsibility between a convening authority and a staff judge advocate. Accordingly, the following revised Rule for Courts-Martial 601(d) is respectfully suggested: (d) When charges may be referred. (1) Special or summary courts-martial. The convening authority may refer a specification for trial by special or summary court-martial only where the convening authority finds that there are reasonable grounds to believe than an offense triable by courtmartial has been committed, that the accused committed it, and that the specification alleged an offense. The convening authority may consider information from any source when making these findings. The convening authority is not required to resolve legal issues which may arise at trial, including objections to evidence, prior to referral. (2) General courts-martial. Unless the requirements of this rule are waived by the accused, the convening authority may not refer a specification for trial by general court-martial unless (A) There has been substantial compliance with the requirements of R.C.M. 405; and (B) The staff judge advocate providing the convening authority with pretrial advice under R.C.M. 406 concludes that: the code; (i) The specification alleges an offense under (ii) The specification is warranted by the evidence indicated in the report of any proceeding conducted pursuant to Article 32 (if there is such a report); (iii) A court-martial would have jurisdiction over the accused and the offense. Page 6 of 8
7 f. Require production of a privilege log when any entity that is represented by counsel asserts an evidentiary privilege. Rule for Courts-Martial 701(f) states that: (f) Information not subject to disclosure. Nothing in this rule shall be construed to require the disclosure of information protected from disclosure by the Military Rules of Evidence. Nothing in this rule shall require the disclosure or production of notes, memoranda, or similar working papers prepared by counsel and counsel s assistants and representatives. This rule should be amended to include the following additional sentence: However, any entity represented by counsel and asserting an evidentiary privilege other than the classified information privilege under Military Rule of Evidence 505 shall, at the time of the assertion of the privilege, give written notice to each party of the general description of the privileged matter (sufficient to permit identification for the purpose of litigation) and of the specific legal basis for the assertion of the privilege. The intended purpose of this language is to require creation and production of a privilege log by any entity represented by counsel at a court-martial. The exception for classified information addresses the consequence that the mere fact of the existence of classified information may itself be classified information subject to the privilege. g. Restrict the Government to the privileges contained in Military Rules of Evidence 505, 506, and 507. Because privileges run contrary to a court's truth-seeking function, they are narrowly construed. United States v. Jasper, 72 M.J. 276, 280 (C.A.A.F. 2013) (quoting United States v. Custis, 65 M.J. 366, 369 (C.A.A.F. 2007)). Further, the Government is a sovereignty whose obligation to govern impartially is as compelling as its obligation to govern at all; and whose interest, therefore, in a criminal prosecution is not that it shall win a case, but that justice shall be done. United States v. Fletcher, 62 M.J. 175, 179 (C.A.A.F. 2005) (quoting Berger v. United States, 295 U.S. 78, 88 (1935)). The privileges for classified information (Military Rule of Evidence 505), government information other than classified information (Military Rule of Evidence 506), and the identity of informants (Military Rule of Evidence 507) are sufficient to protect any official matters deserving of protection from disclosure in a court-martial. Accordingly, these privileges should be the only privileges available to the Government, and the following new Military Rule of Evidence 501(e) is respectfully suggested: (e) Privileges available to the Government. As a party to a proceeding under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, the Page 7 of 8
8 Government may assert only the Classified Information privilege (Military Rule of Evidence 505), the Government Information Other than Classified Information privilege (Military Rule of Evidence 506), and the Identity of Informants privilege (Military Rule of Evidence 507). Nothing in this Rule shall be construed to limit the ability of trial counsel so assert a privilege on behalf of a third-party where authorized. h. Ensure consistency in prosecutions under Clause 1 and Clause 2 of Article 134. The Manual for Courts-Martial, Part IV, 60.c.(2)(a), defines the term to the prejudice of good order and discipline, as follows: To the prejudice of good order and discipline refers only to acts directly prejudicial to good order and discipline and not to acts which are prejudicial only in a remote or indirect sense. Almost any irregular or improper act on the part of a member of the military service could be regarded as prejudicial in some indirect or remote sense; however, this article does not include these distant effects. It is confined to cases in which the prejudice is reasonably direct and palpable. However, similar language is omitted from the definition of the term conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces contained in 60.c.(3). This inconsistency is unwarranted and conflicts with jurisprudence interpreting Article 134. See Parker v. Levy, 417 U.S. 733, (1974). Accordingly, 60.c.(3) should be amended to reflect the same limitations contained in 60.c.(2)(a). Thank you for the opportunity to submit these matters. Respectfully, Zachary Spilman Page 8 of 8
THE JOINT RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE FOR COURTS OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
THE JOINT RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE FOR COURTS OF CRIMINAL APPEALS Effective 1 January 2019 Table of Contents I. General... 1 Rule 1. Courts of Criminal Appeals... 1 Rule 2. Scope of Rules; Title...
More informationSection I Initial Session Through Arraignment PROCEDURAL GUIDE FOR ARTICLE 39(a) SESSION
Joi ntt ri algui de 201 9 1 January201 9 Section I Initial Session Through Arraignment 2 1. PROCEDURAL GUIDE FOR ARTICLE 39(a) SESSION MJ: Please be seated. This Article 39(a) session is called to order.
More informationEXECUTIVE ORDER AMENDMENTS TO THE MANUAL FOR COURTS-MARTIAL, UNITED STATES. By the authority vested in me as President by the
EXECUTIVE ORDER - - - - - - - 2017 AMENDMENTS TO THE MANUAL FOR COURTS-MARTIAL, UNITED STATES By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America,
More informationUNITED STATES NAVY MARINE CORPS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
UNITED STATES NAVY MARINE CORPS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS No. 201600101 THE COURT EN BANC 1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Appellee v. KELLEN M. KRUSE Master-at-Arms Seaman (E-3), U.S. Navy Appellant Appeal
More informationThe Executive Order Process
The Executive Order Process The Return of the Fingerpainter 1. Authority to issue the MCM. 2. Contents of the MCM 3. Pt. IV of the MCM 4. Level of judicial deference to Pt. IV materials 5. (Time permitting)
More informationTRIAL GUIDE Office of the Chief Judge Navy-Marine Corps Trial Judiciary th Street, Suite 1300 Washington, DC
TRIAL GUIDE 2012 Office of the Chief Judge Navy-Marine Corps Trial Judiciary 1250 10th Street, Suite 1300 Washington, DC 20374-5140 Revised May 2, 2012 2012 EDITION Table of Contents TRIAL GUIDE... 4 RIGHTS
More informationUNITED STATES NAVY-MARINE CORPS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS WASHINGTON, D.C.
UNITED STATES NAVY-MARINE CORPS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS WASHINGTON, D.C. Before J.A. MAKSYM, J.R. PERLAK, R.Q. WARD Appellate Military Judges UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. STEPHEN L. SCARINGELLO PRIVATE
More informationJUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS PANEL REQUEST FOR INFORMATION SET # 1
RESPONSES REQUESTED BY NOVEMBER 6, 2014 I. Article 120 of the UMCJ Implementation of 2012 Reforms: Assess and make recommendations for improvements in the implementation of the reforms to the offenses
More informationJudge Advocate Division Interim Supplement to APPENDIX 16 of the Manual for Courts-Martial 1 FORMS FOR ACTIONS
Judge Advocate Division Interim Supplement to APPENDIX 16 of the Manual for Courts-Martial 1 FORMS FOR ACTIONS The forms in this appendix are guides for preparation of the convening authority s initial
More informationTABLE OF CONTENTS FOR JOINT TRIAL GUIDE 2019
Joi ntt ri algui de 201 9 1 January201 9 TABLE OF CONTENTS FOR JOINT TRIAL GUIDE 2019 Section I Initial Session Through Arraignment....1 2-1. PROCEDURAL GUIDE FOR ARTICLE 39(a) SESSION.............................
More informationU.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces Proposed Rules Changes. ACTION: Notice of Proposed Changes to the Rules of Practice and Procedure of
1 This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 11/12/2015 and available online at http://federalregister.gov/a/2015-28598, and on FDsys.gov Billing Code: 5001-06 DEPARTMENT OF
More informationTrial Guide Office of the Chief Judge Navy-Marine Corps Trial Judiciary 1014 N Street SE Suite 250 Washington Navy Yard, DC
Trial Guide 2005 Office of the Chief Judge Navy-Marine Corps Trial Judiciary 1014 N Street SE Suite 250 Washington Navy Yard, DC 20374-5016 Revised 8 September 2005 109 2005 EDITION Table of Contents TRIAL
More informationDiscussion. Discussion
R.C.M. 404(e) ( e ) U n l e s s o t h e r w i s e p r e s c r i b e d b y t h e S e c r e t a r y c o n c e r n e d, d i r e c t a p r e t r i a l i n v e s t i g a t i o n u n d e r R.C.M. 405, and, if
More informationUNITED STATES NAVY-MARINE CORPS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS WASHINGTON, D.C.
UNITED STATES NAVY-MARINE CORPS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS WASHINGTON, D.C. Before J.A. MAKSYM, J.R. PERLAK, B.L. PAYTON-O'BRIEN Appellate Military Judges UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. CALEB P. HOHMAN SERGEANT
More informationA Bill. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.
A Bill To amend chapter of title 0, United States Code (the Uniform Code of Military Justice), to improve the quality and efficiency of the military justice system, and for other purposes. Be it enacted
More informationSummary of Recommendations from the REPORT OF THE MILITARY JUSTICE REVIEW GROUP PART I (December 22, 2015), Relevant to JPP Issues
Summary of Recommendations from the REPORT OF THE MILITARY JUSTICE REVIEW GROUP PART I (December 22, 2015), Relevant to JPP Issues This summary identifies proposals made by the Military Justice Review
More informationUNITED STATES NAVY-MARINE CORPS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS WASHINGTON, D.C.
UNITED STATES NAVY-MARINE CORPS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS WASHINGTON, D.C. Before F.D. MITCHELL, J.A. MAKSYM, R.E. BEAL Appellate Military Judges JESSIE A. QUINTANILLA SERGEANT (E-5), USMC v. UNITED STATES
More informationIN THE U.S. NAVY-MARINE CORPS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS WASHINGTON NAVY YARD WASHINGTON, D.C. BEFORE D.A. WAGNER E.B. STONE M.C. WELLS UNITED STATES
IN THE U.S. NAVY-MARINE CORPS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS WASHINGTON NAVY YARD WASHINGTON, D.C. BEFORE D.A. WAGNER E.B. STONE M.C. WELLS UNITED STATES v. Saul J. ADDISON Mess Management Specialist Seaman
More informationUNITED STATES NAVY-MARINE CORPS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS WASHINGTON, D.C.
UNITED STATES NAVY-MARINE CORPS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS WASHINGTON, D.C. Before R.Q. WARD, J.R. MCFARLANE, K.M. MCDONALD Appellate Military Judges UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. KENNETH A. COLE CAPTAIN
More informationTRIAL GUIDE 2018 Office of the Chief Judge Navy-Marine Corps Trial Judiciary th Street, Suite 1300 Washington, DC
TRIAL GUIDE 2018 Office of the Chief Judge Navy-Marine Corps Trial Judiciary 1250 10th Street, Suite 1300 Washington, DC 20374-5140 12 July 2018 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION I INITIAL SESSION THROUGH ARRAIGNMENT
More information- 6 - the statement will not be filed and will not be a part of the Court s file in the case.
- 6 - the statement will not be filed and will not be a part of the Court s file in the case. Rule 27 is added as follows RULE 27. PRIVACY PROTECTION FOR FILINGS MADE WITH THE COURT (a) Redacted Filings:
More informationRule Preparation of record of trial (a) In general. Each general, special, and summary
unless the sentence prescribed for the offense is mandatory. (d) When directed. The military judge may direct a post-trial session any time before the record is authenticated. The convening authority may
More informationWhat to Know About Victims Rights
Military Justice Branch PRACTICE ADVISORY No. 3-15 X 6 January February 015 015 Background The FY14 and FY15 National Defense Authorization Acts (NDAA) added and amended rights for victims of offenses
More informationTHE ARTICLE 32 PRELIMINARY HEARING OFFICER S GUIDE MILITARY JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
THE ARTICLE 32 PRELIMINARY HEARING OFFICER S GUIDE MILITARY JUSTICE DEPARTMENT DECEMBER 2014 NAVAL JUSTICE SCHOOL 360 ELLIOT STREET NEWPORT, RI 02841-1523 (401) 841-3800 TABLE OF CONTENTS OVERVIEW... 1
More informationUnited States Army Trial Judiciary Second Judicial Circuit, Fort Bragg, North Carolina. ) ) Pretrial Order ) ) )
1. SCHEDULE OF PROCEEDINGS. United States Army Trial Judiciary Second Judicial Circuit, Fort Bragg, North Carolina U N I T E D S T A T E S v. Pretrial Order SGT Robert B. Bergdahl HHC, STB, US Army FORSCOM
More informationDraft Rules on Privacy and Access to Court Records
Draft Rules on Privacy and Access to Court Records As Approved by the Judicial Council of Virginia, March, 2008 Part Nine Rules for Public Access to Court Records Rule 9:1. Purpose; Construction. Rule
More informationRULES OF PRACTICE PROCEDURE
UNITED STATES NAVY-MARINE CORPS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS RULES OF PRACTICE PROCEDURE Effective 27 February 2018 Published Together with the Joint Courts of Criminal Appeals Rules of Practice and Procedure
More informationUNITED STATES NAVY-MARINE CORPS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS WASHINGTON, D.C.
UNITED STATES NAVY-MARINE CORPS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS WASHINGTON, D.C. Before M.D. MODZELEWSKI, E.C. PRICE, C.K. JOYCE Appellate Military Judges UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. ARDEN R. MOORE SHIP'S SERVICEMAN
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES ARMY FIRST JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
IN THE UNITED STATES ARMY FIRST JUDICIAL CIRCUIT U N I T E D S T A T E S ) ) DEFENSE MOTION TO v. ) DISMISS SPECIFICATION 1 ) OF CHARGE II FOR FAILURE ) TO STATE AN OFFENSE MANNING, Bradley E., PFC ) U.S.
More informationNote: New caption for Rule 1:38 adopted July 16, 2009 to be effective September 1, 2009.
RULES GOVERNING THE COURTS OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY PART I. RULES OF GENERAL APPLICATION CHAPTER IV. ADMINISTRATION RULE 1:38. PUBLIC ACCESS TO COURT RECORDS AND ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS Rule 1:38. Public
More informationUNITED STATES ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
UNITED STATES ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS Before FEBBO, SALUSSOLIA and WOLFE Appellate Military Judges Sergeant THOMAS M. ADAMS, Petitioner v. Colonel J. HARPER COOK, U.S. Army, Military Judge, Respondent
More informationUNITED STATES AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS UNITED STATES. Chief Master Sergeant WILLIAM C. GURNEY United States Air Force ACM 37905
UNITED STATES AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS UNITED STATES v. Chief Master Sergeant WILLIAM C. GURNEY United States Air Force 16 May 2013 Sentence adjudged 28 January 2010 by GCM convened at Scott
More information9 July 2018 UNIFORM RULES OF PRACTICE FOR U.S. NAVY-MARINE CORPS TRIAL JUDICIARY
9 July 2018 UNIFORM RULES OF PRACTICE FOR U.S. NAVY-MARINE CORPS TRIAL JUDICIARY TABLE OF CONTENTS PREAMBLE 1 Rule 1: APPLICABILITY... 1 Rule 2: PURPOSE... 1 Rule 3: CONSTRUCTION... 1 Rule 4: REFERRED
More informationCOURTS OF MILITARY REVIEW RULES OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE
Army Regulation 27 13 AFR 111-4 NAVSO P 2319 CGM 5800.5B Military Justice COURTS OF MILITARY REVIEW RULES OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE Headquarters Departments of the Army, The Air Force, The Navy, and The
More informationProtect Our Defenders Comment on Victims Access to Information and the Privacy Act
Protect Our Defenders Comment on Victims Access to Information and the Privacy Act At every stage of the military justice process, victims of sexual assault face significant challenges in obtaining information
More informationUNITED STATES NAVY-MARINE CORPS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS WASHINGTON, D.C.
UNITED STATES NAVY-MARINE CORPS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS WASHINGTON, D.C. Before C.L. REISMEIER, J.K. CARBERRY, G.G. GERDING Appellate Military Judges UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. BRANDON W. BARRETT INTERIOR
More informationIN THE U.S. NAVY-MARINE CORPS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS WASHINGTON NAVY YARD WASHINGTON, D.C. BEFORE W.L. RITTER K.K. THOMPSON J.F.
IN THE U.S. NAVY-MARINE CORPS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS WASHINGTON NAVY YARD WASHINGTON, D.C. BEFORE W.L. RITTER K.K. THOMPSON J.F. FELTHAM Bryan D. BLACK Lieutenant (O-3), U. S. Navy v. UNITED STATES
More informationCOURT-MARTIAL DATA SHEET
1. OG NUMBER 2. NAME (Last, First, Middle Initial) 3. SOCIAL SECURITY NO. 4. RANK 5. UNIT/COMMAND NAME INSTRUCTIONS When an item is not applicable to the record of trial being reviewed, mark the proper
More informationIN A GENERAL COURT-MARTIAL IN THE SECOND JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, U.S. ARMY TRIAL JUDICIARY FORT BRAGG, NORTH CAROLINA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) I.
IN A GENERAL COURT-MARTIAL IN THE SECOND JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, U.S. ARMY TRIAL JUDICIARY FORT BRAGG, NORTH CAROLINA UNITED STATES v. BERGDAHL, ROBERT BOWDRIE (BOWE SGT, U.S. Army HHC, Special Troops Battalion
More informationIn the Supreme Court of the United States
No. 09-1414 In the Supreme Court of the United States RAYMOND L. NEAL, PETITIONER v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
More informationUNITED STATES NAVY-MARINE CORPS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS WASHINGTON, D.C.
UNITED STATES NAVY-MARINE CORPS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS WASHINGTON, D.C. Before B.L. PAYTON-O'BRIEN, R.Q. WARD, J.R. MCFARLANE Appellate Military Judges UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. JORDAN J. ESCOCHEA-SANCHEZ
More informationMILITARY COMMISSIONS TRIAL JUDICIARY RULES OF COURT 24 APRIL 2013 (AMENDED 4 JUNE 2013)
Trial Judiciary Rules of Court -- Military Commssions (2013) (Page 1 of 50) MILITARY COMMISSIONS TRIAL JUDICIARY RULES OF COURT 24 APRIL 2013 (AMENDED 4 JUNE 2013) Trial Judiciary Rules of Court -- Military
More informationRULES OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE
UNITED STATES AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS RULES OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE Effective 11 October 2010 Amended 12 April 2013 Available online at http://afcca.law.af.mil Published Together with the
More informationBefore the Article 32: After the Article 32: After Referral:
69. (Services) What are the requirements for military investigators, JAG officers, or commanders to provide written justifications when declining to pursue a sexual assault case in the military? In order
More informationCase 1:17-cv RCL Document Filed 12/01/17 Page 1 of 12 APPENDIX L
Case 1:17-cv-02311-RCL Document 11-14 Filed 12/01/17 Page 1 of 12 APPENDIX L Case 1:17-cv-02311-RCL Document 11-14 Filed 12/01/17 Page 2 of 12 OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE OFFICE OF MILITARY COMMISSIONS
More informationUNITED STATES AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
UNITED STATES AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS Misc. Dkt. No. 2016-15 Ryne M. SEETO Captain (O-3), U.S. Air Force, Petitioner v. Lee K. LEVY II Lieutenant General (O-9), U.S. Air Force, and Andrew KALAVANOS
More informationCOURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT. In re the Marriage of Tanya Moman and Calvin Moman
C073185 COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT In re the Marriage of Tanya Moman and Calvin Moman TANYA MOMAN, Respondent, v. CALVIN MOMAN, Appellant. Appeal from the Superior
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES HEARST NEWSPAPERS, LLC; THE ASSOCIATED PRESS; BLOOMBERG L.P.; BUZZFEED, INC.; DOW JONES & COMPANY, INC.; FIRST LOOK MEDIA, INC.; GANNETT CO.,
More informationDEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS 3000 MARINE CORPS PENTAGON WASHINGTON DC
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS 3000 MARINE CORPS PENTAGON WASHINGTON DC 20350-3000 MARINE CORPS ORDER 5354.1E ADMIN CH From: Commandant of the Marine Corps To: Distribution
More informationUNITED STATES ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
CORRECTED COPY UNITED STATES ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS Before the Court Sitting En Banc 1 UNITED STATES, Appellee v. Sergeant ERIC F. KELLY United States Army, Appellant ARMY 20150725 Headquarters,
More informationSection 1: Statement of Purpose Section 2: Voluntary Discovery Section 3: Discovery by Order of the Court... 2
Discovery in Criminal Cases Table of Contents Section 1: Statement of Purpose... 2 Section 2: Voluntary Discovery... 2 Section 3: Discovery by Order of the Court... 2 Section 4: Mandatory Disclosure by
More informationUnited States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals
United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals UNITED STATES Appellant v. Antonio OLIVARES Sonar Technician (Surface) Second Class Petty Officer (E-5), U.S. Navy Appellee No. 201800125 Appeal
More informationTITLE XVIII MILITARY COMMISSIONS
H. R. 2647 385 TITLE XVIII MILITARY COMMISSIONS Sec. 1801. Short title. Sec. 1802. Military commissions. Sec. 1803. Conforming amendments. Sec. 1804. Proceedings under prior statute. Sec. 1805. Submittal
More informationUNITED STATES ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
UNITED STATES ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS Before CAIRNS, BROWN, and VOWELL Appellate Military Judges UNITED STATES, Appellee v. Sergeant TRACY PEDEN United States Army, Appellant ARMY 9800258 United
More informationUNITED STATES NAVY MARINE CORPS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
UNITED STATES NAVY MARINE CORPS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS No. 201600285 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Appellee v. SEAN L. MOTSENBOCKER Operations Specialist Second Class (E-5), U.S. Navy Appellant Appeal from
More informationArticle IX DISCIPLINE By-Law and Manual of Procedure
NOTICE 10-01-13 The following By-Laws, Manual and forms became effective August 28, 2013, and are to be used in all Disciplinary cases until further notice. Article IX DISCIPLINE By-Law and Manual of Procedure
More informationUNITED STATES AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
UNITED STATES AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS George L. LULL ) Misc. Dkt. No. 2018-04 Master Sergeant (E-7) ) U.S. Air Force ) Petitioner ) ) v. ) ORDER ) Carl BROBST ) Commander (O-5) ) Commanding
More informationSubtitle D Military Justice, Including. Violence Prevention and Response
1 Subtitle D Military Justice, Including Sexual Assault and Domestic Violence Prevention and Response SEC. 1. TECHNICAL REVISIONS AND CLARIFICATIONS OF CERTAIN PROVISIONS IN THE NATIONAL DE- FENSE AUTHORIZATION
More informationFOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY ANNEX D. Classified Information Procedures Act: Statute, Procedures, and Comparison with M.R.E. 505
ANNEX D Classified Information Procedures Act: Statute, Procedures, and Comparison with M.R.E. 505 Classified Information Procedures Act, 18 United States Code Appendix 1 1. Definitions (a) "Classified
More informationNC General Statutes - Chapter 15A Article 89 1
Article 89. Motion for Appropriate Relief and Other Post-Trial Relief. 15A-1411. Motion for appropriate relief. (a) Relief from errors committed in the trial division, or other post-trial relief, may be
More informationCONTEMPT OF COURT ACT
LAWS OF KENYA CONTEMPT OF COURT ACT NO. 46 OF 2016 Published by the National Council for Law Reporting with the Authority of the Attorney-General www.kenyalaw.org Contempt of Court No. 46 of 2016 Section
More informationRULES OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE
UNITED STATES AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS RULES OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE Effective 11 October 2010 Available online at http://afcca.law.af.mil Published Together with the Joint Courts of Criminal
More informationUNITED STATES AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
UNITED STATES AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS UNITED STATES, ) Respondent ) ) v. ) ) ORDER Lieutenant Colonel (O-5) ) MARK K. ARNESS, ) USAF, ) Petitioner ) Panel No. 2 WEBER, Judge: The petitioner
More informationUNITED STATES ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
UNITED STATES ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS Before HAIGHT, PENLAND and WOLFE Appellate Military Judges UNITED STATES, Appellant v. Private First Class MARQUIS B. HAWKINS United States Army, Appellee ARMY
More informationDiscussion. Discussion
convening authority may deny a request for such an extension. (2) Summary courts-martial. After a summary court-martial, the accused may submit matters under this rule within 7 days after the sentence
More informationCourt Records Glossary
Court Records Glossary Documents Affidavit Answer Appeal Brief Case File Complaint Deposition Docket Indictment Interrogatories Injunction Judgment Opinion Pleadings Praecipe A written or printed statement
More informationFOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY CHAPTER 9. Military Rule of Evidence 505
CHAPTER 9 Military Rule of Evidence 505 Unlike the other rules of privilege contained in the Manual for Courts-Martial, Military Rule of Evidence (M.R.E.) 505 is a rule of both privilege and procedure.
More informationUNITED STATES AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
UNITED STATES AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS U N I T E D S T A T E S, ) Misc. Dkt. No. 2014-02 Appellant ) ) v. ) ) ORDER Master Sergeant (E-7) ) JOHN R. LONG, ) USAF, ) Appellee ) Special Panel MITCHELL,
More informationUNITED STATES AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
UNITED STATES AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS UNITED STATES, ) Misc. Dkt. No. 2013-28 Petitioner ) ) v. ) ) ORDER Lieutenant Colonel (O-5) ) TODD E. MCDOWELL, USAF ) Respondent ) ) Senior Airman (E-4)
More informationUNITED STATES NAVY-MARINE CORPS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS WASHINGTON, D.C.
UNITED STATES NAVY-MARINE CORPS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS WASHINGTON, D.C. Before K.J. BRUBAKER, F.D. MITCHELL, M.C. HOLIFIELD Appellate Military Judges D'URVILLE A. CHRISTOPHER, SR. CRYPTOLOGIC TECHNICIAN
More informationJuly 29, Re: Supplement to the One Hundred Sixty-Second Report of the Rules Committee
July 29, 2009 The Honorable Robert M. Bell, Chief Judge The Honorable Glenn T. Harrell, Jr. The Honorable Lynne A. Battaglia The Honorable Clayton Greene, Jr. The Honorable Joseph F. Murphy, Jr. The Honorable
More informationUNITED STATES NAVY-MARINE CORPS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS WASHINGTON, D.C.
UNITED STATES NAVY-MARINE CORPS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS WASHINGTON, D.C. Before R.E. VINCENT, E.C. PRICE, J.E. STOLASZ Appellate Military Judges WAYNE TATUM STAFF SERGEANT (E-6), U.S. MARINE CORPS v.
More informationPreamble. Rule 1: Applicability
Northern Circuit Rules of Practice 31 August 2012 Preamble The Northern Circuit Rules of Practice (at times referred to as the NCRs) supplement the Uniform Rules of Practice before the Navy-Marine Corps
More informationJUDICIARY OF GUAM ELECTRONIC FILING RULES 1
1 1 Adopted by the Supreme Court of Guam pursuant to Promulgation Order No. 15-001-01 (Oct. 2, 2015). TABLE OF CONTENTS DIVISION I - AUTHORITY AND SCOPE Page EFR 1.1. Electronic Document Management System.
More informationElizabeth Holtzman Chair Judicial Proceedings Panel
JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS PANEL ONE LIBERTY CENTER 875 NORTH RANDOLPH STREET ARLINGTON, VA 22203-1995 March 6,2017 Mr. Anthony Kurta Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Military Personnel Policy 1000
More informationMilitary Justice: Courts-Martial, An Overview
R. Chuck Mason Legislative Attorney March 31, 2011 Congressional Research Service CRS Report for Congress Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress 7-5700 www.crs.gov R41739 Summary A string of recent
More informationUNITED STATES ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
UNITED STATES ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS Before GORDON, JOHNSTON, and ECKER Appellate Military Judges UNITED STATES, Appellee v. Specialist VERNON R. SCOTT, JR. United States Army, Appellant ARMY 9601958
More informationPart 1 Rules for the Continued Delivery of Services in Non- Capital Criminal and Non-Criminal Cases at the Trial Level
Page 1 of 17 Part 1 Rules for the Continued Delivery of Services in Non- Capital Criminal and Non-Criminal Cases at the Trial Level This first part addresses the procedure for appointing and compensating
More informationNC General Statutes - Chapter 5A 1
Chapter 5A. Contempt. Article 1. Criminal Contempt. 5A-1. Reserved for future codification purposes. 5A-2. Reserved for future codification purposes. 5A-3. Reserved for future codification purposes. 5A-4.
More informationInvestigations and Enforcement
Investigations and Enforcement Los Angeles Administrative Code Sections 24.21 24.29 Last Revised August 14, 2017 Prepared by City Ethics Commission CEC Los Angeles 200 North Spring Street, 24 th Floor
More information15-6 Investigation Officer Guidelines
15-6 Investigation Officer Guidelines 1. PURPOSE: a. This guide is intended to assist investigating officers, who have been appointed under the provisions of Army Regulation (AR) 15-6, in conducting timely,
More informationAFLOA/JAJM ARTICLE 32 PRELIMINARY HEARING OFFICER S GUIDE
AFLOA/JAJM ARTICLE 32 PRELIMINARY HEARING OFFICER S GUIDE 23 December 2014 AFLOA/JAJM Article 32 Preliminary Hearing Officer s Guide SECTION I PAGE 7 1. AUTHORITY 7 2. QUALIFICATIONS OF THE PRELIMINARY
More informationNotes on how to read the chart:
To better understand how the USA FREEDOM Act amends the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA), the Westin Center created a redlined version of the FISA reflecting the FREEDOM Act s changes.
More informationRULES OF PROCEDURE FOR THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW COURT
RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW COURT Effective April 27, 2016 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. GENERAL PROVISIONS... 1 1. Authority and Applicability.... 1 2. Definitions.... 1 A. Administrative Law
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS. Before Panel No. 2. THE DENVER POST CORPORATION, ) BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE ) ) Petitioner, )
IN THE UNITED STATES ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS Before Panel No. 2 THE DENVER POST CORPORATION, BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE Petitioner, v. Dkt. No. 2004 1215 UNITED STATES et al., Respondents. February
More informationTitle 37-B: DEFENSE, VETERANS AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
Title 37-B: DEFENSE, VETERANS AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT Chapter 5: MAINE CODE OF MILITARY JUSTICE Table of Contents Section 401. TITLE... 3 Section 402. DEFINITIONS... 3 Section 403. PERSONS SUBJECT TO
More informationGENERAL/SPECIAL COURT-MARTIAL NAVY-MARINE CORPS TRIAL JUDICIARY JUDICIAL CIRCUIT ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
GENERAL/SPECIAL COURT-MARTIAL NAVY-MARINE CORPS TRIAL JUDICIARY JUDICIAL CIRCUIT UNITED STATES v. Accused Rank xxx xx xxxx U.S. (Navy(Marine Corps MEMORANDUM OF PRETRIAL AGREEMENT (Part I I, (Accused,
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS WARREN DROOMERS, 1 Plaintiff-Appellee, UNPUBLISHED June 30, 2005 v No. 253455 Oakland Circuit Court JOHN R. PARNELL, JOHN R. PARNELL & LC No. 00-024779-CK ASSOCIATES,
More informationAPPENDIX 4 TO ENCLOSURE 2 LISTING OF OFFENSES REQUIRING SEX OFFENDER PROCESSING
LISTING OF S REQUIRING SEX OFFENDER PROCESSING 1. A Service member who is convicted in a general or special court-martial of any of the offenses listed in Table 4, must register with the appropriate authorities
More informationFLORIDA SMALL CLAIMS RULES
FLORIDA SMALL CLAIMS RULES 2008 Edition Rules reflect all changes through 33 FLW S253. Subsequent amendments, if any, can be found at www.floridasupremecourt.org/decisions/rules.shtml. CONTINUING LEGAL
More informationAR 15-6 Investigating Officer's Guide
AR 15-6 Investigating Officer's Guide A. INTRODUCTION 1. Purpose: This guide is intended to assist investigating officers who have been appointed under the provisions of Army Regulation (AR) 15-6, in conducting
More informationMay 7, Dear Ms. England:
May 7, 1999 Katherine A. England Assistant Director Division of Market Regulation Securities and Exchange Commission 450 Fifth Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20549 Mail Stop 10-1 Re: File No. SR-NASD-99-08
More informationJudicial Services and Courts Act [Cap 270]
Judicial Services and Courts Act [Cap 270] Commencement: 2 June 2003, except s.22, 37, 8(1), 40(4), 42(6), 47(2) and the Schedule which commenced 12 August 2003 CHAPTER 270 JUDICIAL SERVICES AND COURTS
More informationSEMINOLE TRIBE OF FLORIDA
SEMINOLE TRIBE OF FLORIDA Tribal Court Small Claims Rules of Procedure Table of Contents RULE 7.010. TITLE AND SCOPE... 3 RULE 7.020. APPLICABILITY OF RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE... 3 RULE 7.040. CLERICAL
More informationDepartment of Defense DIRECTIVE. SUBJECT: Political Activities by Members of the Armed Forces on Active Duty
Department of Defense DIRECTIVE NUMBER 1344.10 June 15, 1990 Administrative Reissuance Incorporating Through Change 2, February 17, 2000 SUBJECT: Political Activities by Members of the Armed Forces on
More informationThis code is applicable to all employees of Finbond Mutual Bank, including temporary employees.
POLICY NUMBER 1 DISCIPLINARY CODE OF CONDUCT A) Purpose The Disciplinary Code of Conduct acts as a guide and regulatory tool to both management and employees in the handling of disciplinary matters. The
More informationPolicies and Procedures No. 56
1255 Imperial Avenue, Suite 1000 San Diego, CA 92101-7490 619/231-1466 FAX 619/234-3407 Policies and Procedures No. 56 SUBJECT: Enacted: 9/13/07 FRAUD IN THE WORKPLACE PURPOSE: To establish policies and
More informationFEDERAL COURTS COMMITTEE OF THE NEW YORK COUNTY LAWYERS ASSOCIATION COMMENTS ON PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE FEDERAL RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE
Vincent T. Chang Co-Chair Hon. Joseph Kevin McKay Co-Chair Federal Courts Committee February 12, 2015 FEDERAL COURTS COMMITTEE OF THE NEW YORK COUNTY LAWYERS ASSOCIATION COMMENTS ON PROPOSED AMENDMENTS
More informationJUVENILES. For forms related to civil cases for truant conduct, see the Texas Truancy Resource Manual for truancy courts.
JUVENILES JUVENILES Table of Contents Expunction Alcoholic Beverage Code Offenses Application for Expunction: Alcoholic Beverage Code Offenses... 200 Order for Expunction of Records: Alcoholic Beverage
More informationIn the Supreme Court of the United States
No. 07-343 In the Supreme Court of the United States PATRICK KENNEDY, PETITIONER v. LOUISIANA (CAPITAL CASE) ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA BRIEF FOR THE UNITED STATES AS AMICUS
More information