U.S. v. Hayes, 71 M.J. 112

Core Criminal Law Subjects: Crimes: Article 92 - Failure to Obey Order or Regulation Pre-2019 offenses

1. the elements of Article 92(3), UCMJ, dereliction of duty, are as follows: (1) that the accused had certain duties, (2) that the accused knew or reasonably should have known of the duties, and (3) that the accused was willfully, or through neglect or culpable inefficiency, derelict in the performance of those duties
2. Article 92(3), UCMJ, dereliction of duty, requires the existence of a duty; the MCM states that the duty may be imposed by treaty, statute, regulation, lawful order, standard operating procedure, or custom of the service; all of the examples of duties listed in the MCM constitute military-specific duties; CAAF has never affirmed a conviction for dereliction of duty imposed by state law alone
3. Article 92(3), UCMJ, dereliction of duty, requires proof of certain military duties; it does not assume such duties
4. evidence that appellant consumed alcohol in a hotel room and the hotel’s casino while under the age of 21 was legally insufficient for a conviction under Article 92(3), UCMJ, dereliction of duty, where the government failed to establish through competent evidence that there was a specific military duty under Article 92(3), UCMJ, to either obey state laws in general, or, more specifically, the Nevada state law prohibiting consumption of alcohol by persons under the age of 21 in any saloon, resort, or place where alcohol is sold; although it was uncontested that consuming alcohol in any saloon, resort, or place where alcohol is sold while under the age of 21 was a violation of Nevada state law, when the evidence in the record was viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution, it was insufficient for any rational trier of fact to conclude that appellant was bound by a military duty, stemming from a custom of the service and subject to sanction under Article 92(3), UCMJ, to obey Nevada’s alcohol law, or in the alternative, all state laws in Nevada - an obligation imposed on all citizens within the state generally

Core Criminal Law Subjects: Crimes: Article 134 - General Article Pre-2019 offenses

1. many violations of state law can be prosecuted under Article 134, UCMJ, 10 USC § 934, through the federal Assimilative Crimes Act, 18 USC § 13, assuming at least concurrent federal jurisdiction over the situs of the offense

Core Criminal Law Subjects: Crimes: Art. 134 - Miscellaneous -- Clause 1, Clause 2, or Clause 3 Pre-2019 offenses

1. many violations of state law can be prosecuted under Article 134, UCMJ, 10 USC § 934, through the federal Assimilative Crimes Act, 18 USC § 13, assuming at least concurrent federal jurisdiction over the situs of the offense

Core Criminal Law Subjects: Evidence: Generally

1. argument by trial counsel and statements by the military judge are not evidence

Trial Stages: Merits: Argument

1. argument by trial counsel and statements by the military judge are not evidence

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

1. the test for legal sufficiency is whether, considering the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, a reasonable factfinder could have found all of the essential elements beyond a reasonable doubt