U.S. v. Falk, 50 M.J. 385

Military Justice Personnel: Prosecution Function: Discretion

1. conduct which may be to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces or service discrediting may also be a crime under Title 18 of the United States Code; therefore, an accuser in preferring charges, or trial counsel in prosecuting, may opt to rely on the generally applicable federal penal statute rather than to proceed under the first two clauses of Article 134

Core Criminal Law Subjects: Crimes: Art. 134 - Miscellaneous -- Clause 1, Clause 2, or Clause 3 Pre-2019 offenses

1. conduct which may be to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces or service discrediting may also be a crime under Title 18 of the United States Code; therefore, an accuser in preferring charges, or trial counsel in prosecuting, may opt to rely on the generally applicable federal penal statute rather than to proceed under the first two clauses of Article 134

Trial Stages: Merits: Guilty Pleas

1. appellate courts will not speculate as to the existence of facts which might invalidate a guilty plea, but must consider the entire record in a case in determining the providence of an appellant’s pleas
2. appellant’s guilty plea must be set aside as improvident where: (1) the military judge’s explanation of the elements of the offense corresponded with the specification as amended, but not with the statute in effect at time of the offense; (2) the statute under which appellant was convicted did not exist at the time of his offense; and (3) the stipulated facts were insufficient to support a conviction under the statute existing at the time of the offense

Trial Stages: Appeals: Standards of Review, Burdens, etc.

1. appellate courts will not speculate as to the existence of facts which might invalidate a guilty plea, but must consider the entire record in a case in determining the providence of an appellant’s pleas

Miscellaneous Matters: Statutes, Treaties, Regulations, Executive Orders, Directives, etc.: Generally

1. in interpreting statute, the court must look first to the plain language of the statute and construe its provisions in terms of its object and policy, as well as the provisions of any related statutes, in order to ascertain the intent of Congress; in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the ordinary meaning of the words used expresses the legislative intent; and if the statute is unclear, the court looks next to the legislative history

Miscellaneous Matters: Statutes, Treaties, Regulations, Executive Orders, Directives, etc.: United States Code

1. 18 USC § 2252, dealing with visual depictions of child pornography, was supplemented by the addition of a new section, § 2252A, which was presumably designed to encompass some additional means of possessing child pornography that were not already covered by existing statutes