U.S. v. St. Jean, 83 M.J. 109

Military Justice Personnel: Military Judge: Discretion

1. in this case, the motions judge did not abuse his discretion in excluding evidence under MRE 412 of a prior sexual encounter (i.e., a kissing incident between appellant and victim) because exclusion was within the range of choices reasonably arising from the applicable facts and the law; in this regard, the two interactions at issue here between appellant and the victim were quite dissimilar; making out was simply not comparable to sexual intercourse; stated differently, the fact that a person consented to kissing on one day is not particularly probative of the issue of whether that person consented to full sexual intercourse a day later; furthermore, the motions judge did not fail to analyze appellant’s proffered evidence under the constitutional exception to MRE 412 or to adequately conduct a MRE 403 analysis
2. in this case, the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in requiring the defense to make a sufficient proffer before evidence about hickeys allegedly arising from the charged sexual assault would be deemed admissible at trial under MRE 412; here, the judge asked the defense what evidence was before the court that the hickeys were from the night of the offense; the defense counsel stated that he could possibly address the matter later, but never returned to it; as such, the judge never affirmatively excluded the evidence, and under this circumstance, there was no ruling by the judge to be appealed, and hence nothing for an appellate court to review
3. military judges receive wide discretion in conducting balancing under MRE 403, but military judges’ rulings receive less deference if they fail to articulate their analysis on the record

Core Criminal Law Subjects: Evidence: Balancing

1. military judges receive wide discretion in conducting balancing under MRE 403, but military judges’ rulings receive less deference if they fail to articulate their analysis on the record
2. an appellate court may affirm a military judge’s ruling if he or she arrived at the correct result, even if for the wrong reason; therefore, even if the court were to conclude that a military judge failed to properly conduct an MRE 403 analysis, it could nonetheless affirm the ruling

Core Criminal Law Subjects: Evidence: Sexual Assault and Child Molestation

1. MRE 412 is a rule of exclusion which provides that in any proceeding involving an alleged sexual offense, evidence of a victim’s sexual behavior or predisposition is not admissible, subject to three limited exceptions
2. MRE 412(b)(2) makes admissible evidence of specific instances of a victim’s sexual behavior with respect to the person accused of the misconduct, if offered by the accused to prove consent
3. MRE 412(b)(3) makes admissible evidence of other sexual behavior if its exclusion would violate the accused’s constitutional rights; generally, this means evidence must be admitted under MRE 412(b)(3) when the evidence is relevant, material, and favorable to the defense
4. an accused bears the burden of demonstrating that one of the three exceptions to MRE 412 applies
5. evidence falling under any MRE 412 exception is still subject to MRE 403, which permits a military judge to exclude relevant evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of one or more of the following: unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the members, undue delay, wasting time, or needlessly presenting cumulative evidence
6. in this case, the motions judge did not abuse his discretion in excluding evidence under MRE 412 of a prior sexual encounter (i.e., a kissing incident between appellant and victim) because exclusion was within the range of choices reasonably arising from the applicable facts and the law; in this regard, the two interactions at issue here between appellant and the victim were quite dissimilar; making out was simply not comparable to sexual intercourse; stated differently, the fact that a person consented to kissing on one day is not particularly probative of the issue of whether that person consented to full sexual intercourse a day later; furthermore, the motions judge did not fail to analyze appellant’s proffered evidence under the constitutional exception to MRE 412 or to adequately conduct a MRE 403 analysis
7. in this case, the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in requiring the defense to make a sufficient proffer before evidence about hickeys allegedly arising from the charged sexual assault would be deemed admissible at trial under MRE 412; here, the judge asked the defense what evidence was before the court that the hickeys were from the night of the offense; the defense counsel stated that he could possibly address the matter later, but never returned to it; as such, the judge never affirmatively excluded the evidence, and under this circumstance, there was no ruling by the judge to be appealed, and hence nothing for an appellate court to review

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

1. an appellate court reviews a military judge’s decision to admit evidence for an abuse of discretion; this abuse of discretion standard is a strict one, calling for more than a mere difference of opinion; the challenged action must be arbitrary, fanciful, clearly unreasonable, or clearly erroneous
2. an absence on the record of a military judge’s reasoning does not, by itself, provide a basis for an appellate court finding error; unless there are contrary indications, an appellate court must assume a military judge properly considered an accused’s claim consistent with the law
3. under the abuse of discretion standard, a military judge’s ruling will be reversed only if his or her findings of fact are clearly erroneous, the court’s decision is influenced by an erroneous view of the law, or the military judge’s decision on the issue at hand is outside the range of choices reasonably arising from the applicable facts and the law
4. an appellate court may affirm a military judge’s ruling if he or she arrived at the correct result, even if for the wrong reason