U.S. v. Mangahas, 77 M.J. 220

First Principles: Constitutional Matters: Generally

1. it is a long-established principle that federal courts will avoid a constitutional question if the issue presented in a case may be adjudicated on a nonconstitutional ground; this is true even where the nonconstitutional ground, although raised at trial, is not raised by the parties on appeal

Core Criminal Law Subjects: Crimes: Article 120 - Rape and Carnal Knowledge Pre-2019 offenses

1. the offense of rape of an adult woman committed in 1997, a violation of Article 120, UCMJ, was not a crime punishable by death within the meaning of Article 43, UCMJ, and thus was not exempt from the five year statute of limitations; the prior decisions of US v. Stebbins, 61 MJ 366 (CAAF 2005), and Willenbring v. Neurauter, 48 MJ 152 (CAAF 1998), are overruled to the extent that they hold that rape was punishable by death at the time of the charged offense
2. while under federal law the statute of limitations for rape is five years, 18 USC § 3282, in 2006, Congress amended the statute of limitations in the military, so that a person charged with rape, or rape of a child may be tried and punished at any time without limitation; in 2013, Congress again amended the statute to substitute rape or sexual assault, or rape or sexual assault of a child for rape, or rape of a child

Core Criminal Law Subjects: Crimes: Article 120 - Rape, Sexual Assault, and Other Sexual Misconduct Pre-2019 offenses

1. while under federal law the statute of limitations for rape is five years, 18 USC § 3282, in 2006, Congress amended the statute of limitations in the military, so that a person charged with rape, or rape of a child may be tried and punished at any time without limitation; in 2013, Congress again amended the statute to substitute rape or sexual assault, or rape or sexual assault of a child for rape, or rape of a child

Core Criminal Law Subjects: Crimes: Article 120b - Rape and Sexual Assault Generally Pre-2019 offenses

1. while under federal law the statute of limitations for rape is five years, 18 USC § 3282, in 2006, Congress amended the statute of limitations in the military, so that a person charged with rape, or rape of a child may be tried and punished at any time without limitation; in 2013, Congress again amended the statute to substitute rape or sexual assault, or rape or sexual assault of a child for rape, or rape of a child

Core Criminal Law Subjects: Crimes: Article 120b - Rape and Sexual Assault of a Child Pre-2019 offenses

1. while under federal law the statute of limitations for rape is five years, 18 USC § 3282, in 2006, Congress amended the statute of limitations in the military, so that a person charged with rape, or rape of a child may be tried and punished at any time without limitation; in 2013, Congress again amended the statute to substitute rape or sexual assault, or rape or sexual assault of a child for rape, or rape of a child

Core Criminal Law Subjects: Defenses: Generally

1. an accused is subject to the statute of limitations in force at the time of the offense
2. statutes of limitations represent the legislative judgment that it is unjust to fail to put the adversary on notice to defend within a specified period of time and that the right to be free of stale claims in time comes to prevail over the right to prosecute them; thus, in the realm of criminal prosecution, after a certain time, no quantum of evidence is sufficient to convict; in addition, criminal statutes of limitations are to be liberally interpreted in favor of repose

Trial Stages: Pretrial: Charges and Specifications

1. an accused is subject to the statute of limitations in force at the time of the offense
2. statutes of limitations represent the legislative judgment that it is unjust to fail to put the adversary on notice to defend within a specified period of time and that the right to be free of stale claims in time comes to prevail over the right to prosecute them; thus, in the realm of criminal prosecution, after a certain time, no quantum of evidence is sufficient to convict; in addition, criminal statutes of limitations are to be liberally interpreted in favor of repose

Trial Stages: Appeals: Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces

1. the CAAF is generally not free to digress from applicable Supreme Court precedent on matters of constitutional law; absent articulation of a legitimate military necessity or distinction, or a legislative or executive mandate to the contrary, the CAAF has a duty to follow Supreme Court precedent

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

1. the applicable statute of limitations is a question of law that an appellate court reviews de novo
2. criminal statutes of limitations are to be liberally interpreted in favor of repose

Miscellaneous Matters: Statutes, Treaties, Regulations, Executive Orders, Directives, etc.: Generally

1. statutes of limitations represent the legislative judgment that it is unjust to fail to put the adversary on notice to defend within a specified period of time and that the right to be free of stale claims in time comes to prevail over the right to prosecute them; thus, in the realm of criminal prosecution, after a certain time, no quantum of evidence is sufficient to convict; in addition, criminal statutes of limitations are to be liberally interpreted in favor of repose

Miscellaneous Matters: Judicial Review: Generally

1. it is a long-established principle that federal courts will avoid a constitutional question if the issue presented in a case may be adjudicated on a nonconstitutional ground; this is true even where the nonconstitutional ground, although raised at trial, is not raised by the parties on appeal
2. criminal statutes of limitations are to be liberally interpreted in favor of repose

Miscellaneous Matters: Judicial Review: Stare Decisis

1. courts do not lightly overrule precedent, but stare decisis is a principle of decision making, not a rule, and need not be applied when the precedent at issue is badly reasoned