U.S. v. Rocha, 86 M.J. 399

Core Criminal Law Subjects: Crimes: Article 134: Indecent Conduct Offenses on/after 1 Jan 2019

1. private consensual sexual activity is not punishable under Article 134, UCMJ, as an indecent act absent aggravating circumstances; and the presence or absence of an aggravating circumstance is a question of fact to be resolved by the factfinder
2. in this case, where the CCA concluded that the government failed to prove the existence of any aggravating circumstance of a private consensual sexual activity charged under Article 134, UCMJ, beyond a reasonable doubt and applied the correct legal principles, the CAAF could not set aside the CCA's determination that the accused's conviction for indecent conduct was factually insufficient

Trial Stages: Appeals: Courts of Criminal Appeals › Factual sufficiency

1. review of the factual sufficiency of the evidence in a court-martial is a special power and duty that Congress conferred only on the CCAs; thus, whether the evidence is factually insufficient because the government failed to prove an aggravating circumstance beyond a reasonable doubt is a determination solely for the CCA to make

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

1. because the CAAF lacks the authority to make its own findings of fact or to conduct its own factual sufficiency review, it cannot reassess the CCA's factual determinations; thus, whether the evidence is factually insufficient because the government failed to prove an aggravating circumstance beyond a reasonable doubt is a determination solely for the CCA to make
2. the CAAF's ability to review a CCA's factual determination is limited to examining whether the CCA applied incorrect legal principles