U.S. v. Huntzinger, 69 M.J. 1

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

1. the military rules of evidence with respect to the search and seizure powers granted to military commanders in MREs 311 to 317 apply in domestic and deployed locations; although the application of the rules and the exceptions therein depend upon the context, there is no general exception for locations or living quarters in a combat zone
2. there is no constitutional requirement that the person issuing a search authorization have some minimal legal or educational qualifications

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

1. the military rules of evidence with respect to the search and seizure powers granted to military commanders in MREs 311 to 317 apply in domestic and deployed locations; although the application of the rules and the exceptions therein depend upon the context, there is no general exception for locations or living quarters in a combat zone
2. (a military commander may authorize a search based upon probable cause with respect to persons or property under the control of the commander in accordance with MRE 315(d)(1)
3. MRE 315(d) provides that a person authorizing a probable cause search must be an impartial individual; the evaluation of impartiality includes consideration of whether a commander’s actions call into question the commander’s ability to review impartially the facts and circumstances of the case; to the extent that appellate case law has indicated that a commander acting as a law enforcement official with a police attitude may be disqualified from authorizing a search, the disqualification applies when the evidence demonstrates that the commander exhibited bias or appeared to be predisposed to one outcome or another; the participation of a commander in investigative activities in furtherance of command responsibilities, without more, does not require a per se disqualification of a commander from authorizing a search under MRE 315; in that regard, a commander’s direction to take reasonable investigative steps to ascertain the facts prior to making an impartial probable cause decision does not disqualify the commander from issuing a search authorization under MRE 315
4. there is no constitutional requirement that the person issuing a search authorization have some minimal legal or educational qualifications
5. the requirement for impartiality of a commander issuing a search authorization serves to establish an orderly process and prevent the magistrate from representing a law enforcement interest while at the same time authorizing searches and seizures
6. the critical inquiry in determining if a commander was biased or participated in an investigation to such an extent, or in such a manner, that he compromised his ability to act impartially in issuing a search authorization is whether the commander conducted an independent assessment of the facts before issuing the search authority and remained impartial throughout the investigation process
7. commander who ordered investigation after he learned that child pornography was potentially circulating among members of his unit was not disqualified from authorizing a search of the accused’s computer on the ground that he was not impartial, where he did not predetermine any issues or the outcome of the probable cause decision prior to hearing and viewing the evidence; he did not authorize the search until after the investigating officer had narrowed the potential suspects to three soldiers, including the accused, and his subsequent actions, such as requesting the computer password from the accused, reviewing the files on the computer, and evaluating the evidence, reflect the reasonable actions of a commander charged with maintaining good order and discipline within his unit; as such, he was not disqualified from viewing the fruits of the search for the purposes of exercising his responsibilities over the unit as a commander

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

1. (a military commander may authorize a search based upon probable cause with respect to persons or property under the control of the commander in accordance with MRE 315(d)(1)
2. MRE 315(d) provides that a person authorizing a probable cause search must be an impartial individual; the evaluation of impartiality includes consideration of whether a commander’s actions call into question the commander’s ability to review impartially the facts and circumstances of the case; to the extent that appellate case law has indicated that a commander acting as a law enforcement official with a police attitude may be disqualified from authorizing a search, the disqualification applies when the evidence demonstrates that the commander exhibited bias or appeared to be predisposed to one outcome or another; the participation of a commander in investigative activities in furtherance of command responsibilities, without more, does not require a per se disqualification of a commander from authorizing a search under MRE 315; in that regard, a commander’s direction to take reasonable investigative steps to ascertain the facts prior to making an impartial probable cause decision does not disqualify the commander from issuing a search authorization under MRE 315
3. MRE 315(f)(2) defines probable cause as a reasonable belief that the person, property, or evidence sought is located in the place or on the person to be searched
4. in this case, the search of the accused’s computer during an investigation of child pornography was supported by probable cause, where the accused was one of a small number of individuals who had shared music files with another individual who later passed on these files to another soldier and both discovered a suspected video clip of child pornography on their computers

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

1. an appellate court reviews a military judge’s denial of a motion to suppress for an abuse of discretion; an abuse of discretion occurs when the military judge’s findings of fact are clearly erroneous or based upon a misapprehension of the law
2. an appellate court reviews the legal question of sufficiency for finding probable cause de novo, using a totality of the circumstances test
3. in determining whether a search was supported by probable cause, the duty of a reviewing court is simply to ensure that the magistrate had a substantial basis for concluding that probable cause existed
4. reviewing court applies four key principles in reviewing probable cause determinations for a search authorization under MRE 315: (1) the court views the facts in the light most favorable to the prevailing party; (2) the court gives substantial deference to the probable cause determination made by a neutral and detached magistrate; (3) the court resolves close cases in favor of the magistrate’s decision; and (4) the court views the facts in a commonsense manner