U.S. v. Doty, 51 M.J. 464

First Principles: Constitutional Matters: Right to a Speedy Trial

1. the conclusion whether an accused received a speedy trial is a legal question that is reviewed de novo; any underlying findings of fact by the military judge are given substantial deference and will be reversed only for clear error

Trial Stages: Merits: Trial Procedures › Arraignment

1. in order for an accused to be brought to trial within the meaning of RCM 707, he must be called upon to plead, the process known as arraignment; even where conducted “in the nick of time” on the 119th day, the arraignment was proper and not a sham
2. there was no reason to question appellant’s arraignment based on the fact that the government was unprepared to present its case on the merits immediately following arraignment; arraignment serves to protect an accused’s rights because judicial authority over an accused’s case is enhanced while a convening authority’s ability to affect the case decreases, and the accused remains free to make a motion for a speedy trial

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

1. the conclusion whether an accused received a speedy trial is a legal question that is reviewed de novo; any underlying findings of fact by the military judge are given substantial deference and will be reversed only for clear error

Miscellaneous Matters: Speedy Trial: Rule for Courts-Martial 707

1. in order for an accused to be brought to trial within the meaning of RCM 707, he must be called upon to plead, the process known as arraignment; even where conducted “in the nick of time” on the 119th day, the arraignment was proper and not a sham
2. rule stopping the speedy trial clock of RCM 707 when an accused is arraigned will not be unilaterally modified by appellate decision where that rule is a clearly written Presidential rule that does not conflict with the UCMJ or the Constitution
3. there was no reason to question appellant’s arraignment based on the fact that the government was unprepared to present its case on the merits immediately following arraignment; arraignment serves to protect an accused’s rights because judicial authority over an accused’s case is enhanced while a convening authority’s ability to affect the case decreases, and the accused remains free to make a motion for a speedy trial