U.S. v. Barreto, 57 M.J. 127

Core Criminal Law Subjects: Witnesses: Production of

1. whether the prosecution has satisfied its duty to produce under RCM 703 is a question of reasonableness; the ultimate question is whether the witness is unavailable despite good-faith efforts undertaken prior to trial to locate and present that witness
2. abatement of proceedings under RCM 703(b)(3) was not required because missing witnesses were not found to be critical and vital to appellant’s defense and necessary for a fair trial where: (1) it was not clear whether the driver of the lead truck in the left lane even witnessed the accident, and the record indicates that the driver of the lead truck did not stop; (2) appellant hit the third vehicle, and the driver of the second car -- a surgeon who stopped to render aid -- stated that he witnessed the collision from his rearview mirror; and (3) the Government’s proffer of three witnesses with unobstructed views of appellant as he drove along B-50 and the accident, in addition to its other eyewitness and expert evidence, constituted an adequate substitute for the testimony of the unknown witnesses

Trial Stages: Pretrial: Competence of the Accused

1. question of whether an accused is mentally competent to stand trial is one of fact, and the military judge’s determination will be overturned on appeal only if it is clearly erroneous
2. an accused must have sufficient present ability to consult with his lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational understanding and a rational as well as factual understanding of the proceedings against him in order to stand trial; however, the accused’s inability to remember the details of an offense does not, without more, compel a finding of incompetence
3. appellant’s amnesia did not preclude him from intelligently cooperating in his defense or taking the stand on his own behalf: (1) his amnesic condition did not impair his ability to rationally examine and assess the strength of the Government’s evidence against him; (2) the defense was provided with its own accident reconstruction expert and an independent investigator to assist in preparing a defense and evaluating the Government’s evidence; and (3) appellant was not precluded from providing his defense counsel with his knowledge of his character, propensities, driving habits, and previous experiences with his vehicle and the roadway involved in the incident, and identifying character witnesses to corroborate or otherwise testify to these matters on his behalf

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

1. question of whether an accused is mentally competent to stand trial is one of fact, and the military judge’s determination will be overturned on appeal only if it is clearly erroneous