U.S. v. Ruiz, 54 M.J. 138

Core Criminal Law Subjects: Evidence: Confessions and Admissions › Generally

1. statement by AAFES security personnel, “[t]here seems to be some AAFES merchandise that hasn’t been paid for”, was not an interrogation requiring Article 31(b) warnings because the statement was no more than advising the appellant why he was stopped and why security personnel asked appellant to accompany them back to the office; these were words normally attendant to the detention process and not an interrogation
2. interrogation does not include words or actions normally attendant to arrest and custody; merely informing a person of what he was suspected would not mandate an Article 31 rights’ advisement

Core Criminal Law Subjects: Evidence: Confessions and Admissions › Admission by silence

1. a person’s failure to deny an accusation of wrongdoing concerning an offense for which at the time of the alleged failure the person was under official investigation does not support an inference of an admission of the truth of the accusation
2. cross-examination by trial counsel focused on attacking the accused’s version of the events in an AAFES security office, in which the accused portrayed himself as an innocent man wrongly accused by the lying AAFES security personnel; questioning on cross-examination about whether the accused had protested his innocence and why the accused did not proclaim his innocence to a law enforcement officer who arrived later were proper cross-examination and not improper comment on the accused’s silence

Core Criminal Law Subjects: Evidence: Waiver

1. objections to questions asked on cross-examination must be made at the time that they are asked

Trial Stages: Merits: Argument

1. failure to make timely objection to matters raised in argument will waive any issue on appeal with respect thereto in the absence of plain error

Trial Stages: Appeals: Preservation of Error / Plain Error

1. Court of Appeals for the Armed forces may exercise its discretion to reverse on a forfeited error only if the error materially prejudices the substantial rights of an appellant or the error seriously affects the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings
2. the plain error doctrine is to be used sparingly and only in those circumstances in which a miscarriage of justice would otherwise result

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

1. a military judge’s evidentiary rulings are reviewed under an abuse of discretion standard
2. a ruling that a statement was made voluntarily may present a question of law which is reviewed de novo
3. whether an Article 31(b) warning is required is reviewed de novo

Trial Stages: Appeals: Waiver

1. objections to questions asked on cross-examination must be made at the time that they are asked
2. failure to make timely objection to matters raised in argument will waive any issue on appeal with respect thereto in the absence of plain error