United States v. Forbes
Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces
1DissentCrawford, Judge
I respectfully dissent from (1) the extensive rulemaking by the majority, and (2) the majority’s failure to analyze the harmless error rule in the context of this case. Article 59(a), Uniform Code of Military Justice, (UCMJ), 10 U.S.C. § 859(a) (2000). I agree with Judge Learned Hand that “[i]t would be strange indeed to conclude that this cautionary instruction violates the very constitutional provision it is intended to protect.” Lakeside v. Oregon, 435 U.S. 333, 339, 98 S.Ct. 1091, 55 L.Ed.2d 319 (1978).
Dissatisfied with Military Rule of Evidence (M.R.E.) 301(g), the majority today amends…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Kotteakos v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Bordenkircher v. HayesSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- United States v. DuBayUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1967
- Lakeside v. OregonSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.