U.S. v. White, 54 M.J. 469

First Principles: Jurisdiction: Of U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces

1. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces has jurisdiction under Article 67(c), UCMJ, to determine on direct appeal if the adjudged and approved sentence is being executed in a manner that offends the Eight Amendment or Article 55, UCMJ; Article 67(c) grants the authority to ensure that the severity of the adjudged and approved sentence has not been unlawfully increased by prison officials, and to ensure that the sentence is executed in a manner consistent with Article 55, UCMJ, and the Constitution

First Principles: Constitutional Matters: Cruel and Unusual Punishment

1. whether facts asserted by an appellant constitute a violation of Article 55, UCMJ, or the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution is reviewed de novo
2. in seeking to obtain judicial review of prison conditions, an appellant must establish a clear record of both the legal deficiency in administration of the prison and the jurisdictional basis for the action
3. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces has jurisdiction under Article 67(c), UCMJ, to determine on direct appeal if the adjudged and approved sentence is being executed in a manner that offends the Eight Amendment or Article 55, UCMJ; Article 67(c) grants the authority to ensure that the severity of the adjudged and approved sentence has not been unlawfully increased by prison officials, and to ensure that the sentence is executed in a manner consistent with Article 55, UCMJ, and the Constitution
4. a prisoner must seek administrative relief prior to invoking judicial intervention and must show, absent some unusual or egregious circumstances, that he has exhausted the prisoner-grievance system and that he has petitioned for relief under Article 138, UCMJ
5. except in those circumstances where there is a legislative intent to provide greater statutory protections than the Eighth Amendment, the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Eighth Amendment is applied to claims raised under Article 55, UCMJ
6. the standard applicable for determining what constitutes cruel and unusual punishment is that the Eighth Amendment prohibits punishments which are incompatible with the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society, or which involve the unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain
7. there are two factors that are necessary for an Eighth Amendment claim to succeed regarding conditions of confinement: (1) objectively, an act or omission must result in the denial of necessities and be sufficiently serious; (2) subjectively, there must be a culpable state of mind by prison officials, which is one of deliberate indifference to inmate health or safety – a conscious awareness of the risk or danger to the inmate and a choice to ignore it
8. verbal harassment, intimidation, or abuse, standing alone, does not constitute a constitutional violation, unless there is well-established and clinically diagnosed evidence of psychological pain and evidence that the officer in question acted with a sufficiently culpable state of mind
9. denial of adequate medical attention can constitute an Eighth Amendment or Article 55, UCMJ, violation; failure to provide basic psychiatric and mental health care can constitute deliberate indifference; however, an inmate is entitled to reasonable health care - it is not required that inmate health care be perfect or the best obtainable
10. assertion that two other inmates – one white and one “white-Hispanic” – were allowed to participate in a program, even if true, was insufficient, standing alone, to raise an issue whether appellant was denied similar participation because of his race

Trial Stages: Post-Trial Hearings: DuBay / Factfinding Hearings

1. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces need not remand a case for further factfinding if the court can determine that the facts asserted, even if true, would not entitle an appellant to relief

Trial Stages: Appeals: Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces

1. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces need not remand a case for further factfinding if the court can determine that the facts asserted, even if true, would not entitle an appellant to relief

Trial Stages: Appeals: Preservation of Error / Plain Error

1. a prisoner must seek administrative relief prior to invoking judicial intervention and must show, absent some unusual or egregious circumstances, that he has exhausted the prisoner-grievance system and that he has petitioned for relief under Article 138, UCMJ

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

1. whether facts asserted by an appellant constitute a violation of Article 55, UCMJ, or the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution is reviewed de novo
2. in seeking to obtain judicial review of prison conditions, an appellant must establish a clear record of both the legal deficiency in administration of the prison and the jurisdictional basis for the action