National Institute of Military Justice
  • Home
  • About
    • Officers
    • Board of Directors
    • Fellows
    • Staff
  • CAAFlog
  • Global Reform
  • Library
    • Amicus Briefs
    • Position Papers & Letters
    • Reports
    • Gazette
    • Miscellaneous
    • General Military Law
  • Links
    • State Codes
    • Non-DoD Organizations
    • Foreign Systems
  • Prizes
  • Contact Us
  • Home
  • About
    • Officers
    • Board of Directors
    • Fellows
    • Staff
  • CAAFlog
  • Global Reform
  • Library
    • Amicus Briefs
    • Position Papers & Letters
    • Reports
    • Gazette
    • Miscellaneous
    • General Military Law
  • Links
    • State Codes
    • Non-DoD Organizations
    • Foreign Systems
  • Prizes
  • Contact Us

CAAFlog

Gilmet Decided -- CAAF, Resurgent

8/3/2023

 
CAAF has decided the Gilmet case. In a unanimous opinion, the Court held that actual unlawful command influence occurred, and that the curative measures were insufficient. Crucial to the outcome, it seems, was that this was influence directed against defense counsel. Defense counsel are not fungible. Given this, unlawful influence directed at defense counsel becomes somewhat akin to structural error.

Gilmet is significant more so in the disposition of CAAF that it represents: CAAF, resurgent. Guarding against UCI is at the core of CAAF's reason for existence. CAAF is often spoken of as a "bulwark" against UCI. “[A] prime motivation for establishing a civilian Court of Military Appeals was to erect a further bulwark against impermissible command influence.” Thomas, 22 M.J. at 393 (citing Hearings on H.R. 2498 Before a Subcomm. of the House Committee on the Armed Services, 81st Cong., 1st Sess. 608 (1949). But the Court, on its own volition, created a complicated multi-step burden shifting analysis to vindicate this right against UCI. It used the eddies created by this doctrinal maze to deny relief in the high-profile case of Bowe Bergdahl, rather than frankly addressing the reality of what had taken place. Gilmet shows, one hopes, that CAAF is reasserting itself as the bulwark it was meant to be. The Shaw comments in Gilmet demonstrate a serious problem in the culture of military justice--at least in the Marine Corps, which is far too small to be able to set up a system of its own that is not tainted by personal and professional allegiances (or vendettas). Today's decision represents an important message, sent by a civilian court, that the military must conform its system to norms of due process and independence.
gilmet_23-0010_opinion.pdf
File Size: 157 kb
File Type: pdf
Download File

Brenner Fissell


Comments are closed.
    Disclaimer: Posts are the authors' personal opinions and do not reflect the position of any organization or government agency.
    Picture
    Co-editors:
    Phil Cave
    Brenner Fissell
    Links
    ​

    UCMJ
    CAAF
    -Daily Journal
    -Current Term Opinions
    ACCA
    AFCCA
    CGCCA
    NMCCA
    Joint R. App. Pro.
    UMCJ History
    Global Reform
    Army Lawyer
    JAG Reporter
    ​
    Army Crim. L. Deskbook

    CAAFlog 1.0
    CAAFlog 2.0

    Archives

    September 2023
    August 2023
    July 2023
    June 2023
    May 2023
    April 2023
    March 2023
    February 2023
    January 2023
    December 2022
    November 2022
    October 2022
    September 2022
    August 2022
    July 2022
    June 2022
    May 2022
    April 2022
    March 2022

    Categories

    All
    ByTheNumbers
    Case2Watch
    CrimLaw
    Evidence
    Fed. Cts.
    Habeas Cases
    IHL/LOAC
    Legislation
    MilJust Transparency
    NewsOWeird
    Opinions ACCA
    Opinions-ACCA
    Opinions AFCCA
    Opinions CAAF
    Opinions CGCCA
    Opinions NMCCA
    Readings
    Sentenciing
    Sex Off. Reg.
    Sexual Assault
    Supreme Court
    Unanimous Verdicts

    RSS Feed

Proudly powered by Weebly