U.S. v. Rogers, 67 M.J. 162

Military Justice Personnel: Military Judge: Duties and Responsibilities

1. a military judge reviews a magistrate’s decision to issue a search authorization to determine whether the magistrate had a substantial basis for concluding that probable cause existed

Military Justice Personnel: Military Judge: Discretion

1. an abuse of discretion exists if the military judge found clearly erroneous facts or misapprehended the law
2. an affidavit containing a witness’s account of appellant’s alleged cocaine use provided probable cause for a search authorization permitting the seizure of appellant’s hair for drug testing, where the witness stated that she had seen appellant use cocaine in his home, the witness was aware of appellant’s prior court-martial charges and described a scar on his stomach, which were not matters of general knowledge within the squadron, the witness promptly reported the incident to her chain of command and her statements remained consistent, and a forensic science consultant confirmed that appellant’s hair would reveal cocaine use if he was a chronic user; accordingly, despite some other circumstances that undercut a finding of probable cause, the military judge did not abuse his discretion in upholding the search authorization in this case; a sufficient nexus existed between the alleged crime and the seizure of appellant’s hair; as such, sufficient facts existed to support a reasonable belief that testing appellant’s body hair would yield evidence of his use of cocaine

Core Criminal Law Subjects: Evidence: Search and Seizure › Probable cause

1. a military judge reviews a magistrate’s decision to issue a search authorization to determine whether the magistrate had a substantial basis for concluding that probable cause existed
2. a magistrate has a substantial basis to issue a warrant when, based on the totality of the circumstances, a common-sense judgment would lead to the conclusion that there is a fair probability that evidence of a crime will be found at the identified location
3. in light of the constitutional preference for warrants, substantial deference is afforded in cases where a magistrate determines that probable cause exists
4. an affidavit containing a witness’s account of appellant’s alleged cocaine use provided probable cause for a search authorization permitting the seizure of appellant’s hair for drug testing, where the witness stated that she had seen appellant use cocaine in his home, the witness was aware of appellant’s prior court-martial charges and described a scar on his stomach, which were not matters of general knowledge within the squadron, the witness promptly reported the incident to her chain of command and her statements remained consistent, and a forensic science consultant confirmed that appellant’s hair would reveal cocaine use if he was a chronic user; accordingly, despite some other circumstances that undercut a finding of probable cause, the military judge did not abuse his discretion in upholding the search authorization in this case; a sufficient nexus existed between the alleged crime and the seizure of appellant’s hair; as such, sufficient facts existed to support a reasonable belief that testing appellant’s body hair would yield evidence of his use of cocaine
5. even though some circumstances existed in this case that undercut a finding of probable cause, close calls are to be resolved in favor of sustaining the magistrate’s decision to issue a search authorization

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

1. a military judge reviews a magistrate’s decision to issue a search authorization to determine whether the magistrate had a substantial basis for concluding that probable cause existed
2. a magistrate has a substantial basis to issue a warrant when, based on the totality of the circumstances, a common-sense judgment would lead to the conclusion that there is a fair probability that evidence of a crime will be found at the identified location
3. in light of the constitutional preference for warrants, substantial deference is afforded in cases where a magistrate determines that probable cause exists
4. an affidavit containing a witness’s account of appellant’s alleged cocaine use provided probable cause for a search authorization permitting the seizure of appellant’s hair for drug testing, where the witness stated that she had seen appellant use cocaine in his home, the witness was aware of appellant’s prior court-martial charges and described a scar on his stomach, which were not matters of general knowledge within the squadron, the witness promptly reported the incident to her chain of command and her statements remained consistent, and a forensic science consultant confirmed that appellant’s hair would reveal cocaine use if he was a chronic user; accordingly, despite some other circumstances that undercut a finding of probable cause, the military judge did not abuse his discretion in upholding the search authorization in this case; a sufficient nexus existed between the alleged crime and the seizure of appellant’s hair; as such, sufficient facts existed to support a reasonable belief that testing appellant’s body hair would yield evidence of his use of cocaine
5. even though some circumstances existed in this case that undercut a finding of probable cause, close calls are to be resolved in favor of sustaining the magistrate’s decision to issue a search authorization

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

1. an appellate court reviews a military judge’s ruling on a motion to suppress for an abuse of discretion; an abuse of discretion exists if the military judge found clearly erroneous facts or misapprehended the law; further, it reviews the facts in the light most favorable to the prevailing party below