U.S. v. Bigelow, 57 M.J. 64

Core Criminal Law Subjects: Evidence: Accomplice Testimony

1. while the better practice is to caution members against placing too much reliance upon the testimony of an accomplice, there is no absolute bar to a conviction based on the testimony of an accomplice, even though there is no cautionary instruction

Trial Stages: Merits: Instructions › Accomplice testimony

1. while the better practice is to caution members against placing too much reliance upon the testimony of an accomplice, there is no absolute bar to a conviction based on the testimony of an accomplice, even though there is no cautionary instruction
2. language from United States v. Gillette, 35 MJ 468, 470 (CMA 1992), may have too broadly suggested a mandatory requirement for the standard Benchbook instruction where none existed; instead, the critical principles of the standard accomplice instruction shall be given, not necessarily the standard instruction itself, word for word

Miscellaneous Matters: Speedy Trial: Post-Trial

1. a 244-day delay between trial and the convening authority’s action was neither unexplained nor inordinate, given the unusual circumstances in this case, which included: that the trial participants were assigned to three different bases in three different countries in Europe; that the record was lengthy – four volumes, totaling 593 pages; and that, apparently from the number of times the military judge returned the record, the record contained numerous errors