U.S. v. Washington, 55 M.J. 441

Trial Stages: Sentence and Punishment: Evidence

1. appellant, a senior airman with over 18 years of active military service and who could retire during her current enlistment, was prejudiced by the military judge’s refusal to admit a summary of expected lost retirement pay if appellant was awarded a punitive discharge
2. the military judge erred when she prevented the defense from presenting to the members a complete picture of the financial loss appellant, a senior airman with over 18 years of active military service and who could retire during her current enlistment, would suffer as a result of a punitive discharge

Trial Stages: Appeals: Harmless / Prejudicial Error

1. military judge’s refusal to admit a summary of expected lost retirement pay if appellant was awarded a punitive discharge was materially prejudicial where appellant suffered post-traumatic stress disorder, appellant’s rehabilitative potential was not necessarily bleak, and the decision to award a punitive discharge was a close call