United States v. Thompson, 50 M.J. 57

Military Justice Personnel: Court Members: Challenges for Cause

1. rulings on challenges for cause are reviewed for abuse of discretion, giving great deference to military judge on issues of actual bias and less deference on questions of implied bias
2. while a liberal standard for ruling on challenges for cause might have avoided issue in this case, the entirety of the voir dire and evidence that the member could follow the judge’s instructions supported finding that member was not bias, prejudice, or impartial despite member’s statements indicating that a noncommissioned officer must accept responsibility for what happens within his or her area of control or presence

Core Criminal Law Subjects: Crimes: Article 77 - Principals Pre-2019 offenses

1. court’s case law has generally interpreted Article 77, principals, to require an affirmative step on the part of the accused
2. evidence supports conviction for rape as a principal where appellant: (1) participated in getting victim helplessly intoxicated, (2) knew another was going to have intercourse with the victim, (3) did nothing to dissuade intercourse when appellant was looked to for approval, and (4) provided a condom; collectively, this evidence was legally sufficient to conclude that appellant encouraged and assisted the rape

Core Criminal Law Subjects: Burdens, Standards, Presumptions, Inferences: Appellate Burdens, Standards, Etc. › Generally

1. test for legal sufficiency is “whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.” Jackson v.Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319 (1979)
2. rulings on challenges for cause are reviewed for abuse of discretion, giving great deference to military judge on issues of actual bias and less deference on questions of implied bias

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

1. test for legal sufficiency is “whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.” Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319 (1979)
2. rulings on challenges for cause are reviewed for abuse of discretion, giving great deference to military judge on issues of actual bias and less deference on questions of implied bias