U.S. v. Griggs, 51 M.J. 418

Core Criminal Law Subjects: Crimes: Article 134 - Indecent Exposure Pre-2019 offenses

1. evidence of indecent exposure was legally sufficient where victims testified that appellant positioned his body in each instance with his pants unzipped and wearing no underwear, so that his genital area was clearly exposed

Core Criminal Law Subjects: Evidence: Other Acts

1. the fact of an acquittal does not necessarily bar evidence of prior acts where those prior acts are relevant and probative
2. at a trial for indecent exposure, military judge did not abuse his discretion by admitting evidence of prior uncharged acts of indecent exposure and masturbation as evidence of intent and absence of mistake under MRE 404(b), where: (1) there was sufficient evidence that the prior acts occurred; (2) the appropriate MRE 403 balancing test was applied; and (3) due sensitivity was exercised toward the fact that the prior acts had been subject to an acquittal

Trial Stages: Appeals: Harmless / Prejudicial Error

1. at a trial for indecent exposure, even if the military judge abused his discretion by admitting evidence of prior uncharged acts of indecent exposure and masturbation, any error was not prejudicial under Article 59(a), UCMJ, in light of the overwhelming evidence that appellant had committed the acts with which he was charged

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

1. test for legal sufficiency is whether, considering the evidence in the light most favorable to the government, a reasonable factfinder could have found all the essential elements beyond a reasonable doubt