U.S. v. Chikaka, 76 M.J. 310

Trial Stages: Sentence and Punishment: Evidence

1. the use of a commanding officer before a court-martial to influence the court members into returning a particular sentence implicates unlawful command influence; the question of appropriateness of punishment is one which must be decided by the court-martial; it cannot be usurped by a witness
2. a commander’s opinion as to an appropriate punishment invades the province of the court-martial and constitutes unlawful command influence

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

1. an appellate court reviews allegations of unlawful command influence de novo; in conducting this review, the court first must determine whether an appellant has met his or her initial burden of presenting some evidence of unlawful command influence; this some evidence standard is low, although an appellant must allege more than mere allegation or speculation; once an appellant has met this initial evidentiary burden, the burden shifts to the government to rebut the allegation of UCI beyond a reasonable doubt

Miscellaneous Matters: Command Influence: Generally

1. the use of a commanding officer before a court-martial to influence the court members into returning a particular sentence implicates unlawful command influence; the question of appropriateness of punishment is one which must be decided by the court-martial; it cannot be usurped by a witness
2. a commander’s opinion as to an appropriate punishment invades the province of the court-martial and constitutes unlawful command influence

Miscellaneous Matters: Command Influence: Burdens

1. an appellant has an initial burden of presenting some evidence of unlawful command influence; this some evidence standard is low, although an appellant must allege more than mere allegation or speculation; once an appellant has met this initial evidentiary burden, the burden shifts to the government to rebut the allegation of UCI beyond a reasonable doubt
2. in this case, appellant presented sufficient evidence of unlawful command influence during the sentencing phase of his court-martial to cause the burden to shift to the government to disprove unlawful command influence beyond a reasonable doubt, where appellant’s commanding officer, who outranked the entire court-martial panel and was within the chain of command of at least one member, was permitted to testify at some length about the importance of a harsh sentence being imposed by the court-martial; this testimony constituted some evidence of unlawful command influence