![]() ![]() 23 (in analyzing whether a Hill s (75 MJ 350 (CAAF 2016)) error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, both the strength of the government’s case against the accused and the content of the military judge’s findings instructions are evaluated with respect to the strength of the government’s case against the accused, where there has been overwhelming evidence of an appellant’s guilt, an appellate court may be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused was convicted on the strength of the evidence alone and that an erroneous propensity instruction did not contribute to the verdict however, where the government’s case is weak, an appellate court cannot know whether the instructions may have tipped the balance in the members’ ultimate determination and thus will find that any error was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt likewise, where it is merely certainly possible that the accused was convicted solely based on properly admitted evidence, an appellate court will not conclude that a Hill s error was harmless furthermore, with respect to the content of the military judge’s findings instructions, where an instruction clearly tells the members that all offenses must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, even those used to draw an inference of propensity, an appellate court may hold that there is no risk the members would apply an impermissibly low standard of proof but, where a military judge gives a propensity instruction that explicitly refers to the preponderance of the evidence standard, an appellate court cannot deny that the military judge’s muddled instructions potentially implicated fundamental conceptions of justice under the Due Process Clause and heightened the risk that the members would apply an impermissibly low standard of proof). 82 (the Due Process Clause guarantees to a military appellant a constitutional right to a timely post-trial review). 157 (the right to cross-examine a witness for impeachment purposes has constitutional underpinnings because of the right to confront witnesses under the Sixth Amendment and the due process right to present a complete defense). FIRST PRINCIPLES: Constitutional Matters: Due Process ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |