U.S. v. Matthews, 53 M.J. 465

Military Justice Personnel: Court Members: Generally

1. court members are presumed to follow military judge’s instructions

Core Criminal Law Subjects: Evidence: Character

1. extrinsic evidence of specific acts is not admissible to rebut evidence of good military character
2. although cross-examination of character witnesses about specific acts is permissible under MRE 405(a), that cross-examination should be limited to acts that would have occurred prior to the crime charged, because the court wants to test character at that time

Core Criminal Law Subjects: Evidence: Other Acts

1. other acts evidence offered under MRE 404(b) must satisfy three tests to be admissible: (1) the evidence must reasonably support a finding by the court members that appellant committed prior crimes, wrongs, or acts; (2) the evidence must make a fact of consequence more or less probable; and (3) the evidence must satisfy the balancing required by MRE 403

Core Criminal Law Subjects: Evidence: Relevance

1. the mere fact that a person had used drugs at times previous to the charged offenses does not make it more or less probable that the person knowingly used drugs on the date charged
2. court rejects the notion that evidence of an unlawful substance in the accused’s urine after the date of the charged offense and not connected to the charged offense may be used to prove knowing use on the date charged
3. in terms of proving guilty knowledge, the “doctrine of chances” posits that it is unlikely that a defendant would be repeatedly innocently involved in the similar suspicious situations; however, the doctrine requires that the proponent of the evidence show that the subsequent misconduct was under circumstances sufficiently similar to the charged offense as to justify an inference that the first misconduct was knowing
4. where prosecution’s proof of knowing use of marijuana was a paper case based upon urinalysis, there was no showing that the circumstances surrounding either the charged use or a subsequent use were sufficiently similar so as to provide a factual basis for the “doctrine of chances” to show guilty knowledge

Trial Stages: Merits: Trial Procedures › Rebuttal

1. the scope of rebuttal is defined by the evidence introduced by the other party; a broad assertion by an accused on direct examination that he or she has never engaged in a certain type of misconduct may open the door to impeachment by extrinsic evidence of the misconduct

Trial Stages: Merits: Instructions › Lesser-included offenses

1. court members are presumed to follow military judge’s instructions

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

1. a military judge’s ruling on the admissibility of evidence will be overturned only if there is a clear abuse of discretion; a military judge abuses his or her discretion if the ruling is influenced by an erroneous view of the law
2. court members are presumed to follow military judge’s instructions