United States v. Bowser
Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces
1Opinion of the Court
CCA 2014-08. On consideration of the certificate for review (74 M.J. 211 (C.A.A.F. 2015)), and the briefs of the parties and amicus curiae, we conclude that the military judge did not abuse his discretion in dismissing all charges and specifications with prejudice following the Government’s refusal to comply with the military judge’s order to produce trial counsel’s witness interview notes for an in camera inspection. “[A] judge is ultimately responsible for the control of his or her court and the trial proceedings,” and “[p]roper case management during a trial, necessary for the protection…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- United States v. GoreCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2004
- United States v. DouglasCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2010
- United States v. VargasCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2014
- United States v. BowserCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2015
3Cited by2 opinions
- United States v. StellatoCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2015
- United States v. Payton-O'brien and RavenscraftNavy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals · 2017