U.S. v. Khamsouk, 57 M.J. 282

Core Criminal Law Subjects: Evidence: Search and Seizure › Generally

1. the Constitution does not permit military investigators greater power to conduct warrantless entries into a civilian home than their civilian counterparts

Core Criminal Law Subjects: Evidence: Search and Seizure › Apprehension/arrest

1. the arrest of a person inside his own home made with a valid arrest warrant does not violate the Fourth Amendment, and does not require a search warrant; an arrest warrant is sufficient to protect a citizen’s privacy interest in his own home when he is arrested there
2. status as an overnight guest is alone enough to show that an individual had an expectation of privacy in the home that society is prepared to recognize as reasonable; the overnight guest has a sufficient interest in another’s home and therefore, is protected from a warrantless arrest in that home under the Fourth Amendment
3. military or civilian officials acting pursuant to a DD Form 553 request to apprehend a military absentee, may not do so by entering a civilian residence without a civilian warrant
4. the DD Form 553 is not the functional equivalent of a civilian arrest warrant in the context of entering a civilian home

Core Criminal Law Subjects: Evidence: Search and Seizure › Commanders

1. while a commander has powers similar to a federal magistrate judge, those powers are constrained in scope to persons and places under military control
2. a military commander — no matter how neutral and impartial he strives to be — cannot pass muster constitutionally as a “magistrate” in the strict sense

Core Criminal Law Subjects: Evidence: Search and Seizure › Expectations of privacy

1. status as an overnight guest is alone enough to show that an individual had an expectation of privacy in the home that society is prepared to recognize as reasonable; the overnight guest has a sufficient interest in another’s home and therefore, is protected from a warrantless arrest in that home under the Fourth Amendment

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

1. a military judge’s denial of a motion to suppress is reviewed for an abuse of discretion; his fact-finding is reviewed under a clearly erroneous standard, and his conclusions of law are reviewed de novo