I’ll be away next week.  My blogging will be somewhere between curtailed and non-existent.  So here’s an advance peek at next week in military justice:

Next week at the Supremes:  There are no anticipated military justice developments at the Supremes on my radar screen for next week.

Next week at CAAF:  CAAF has completed its oral arguments for the term.  One argued case remains undecided:  United States v. Nerad, No. 09-5006/AF.

Next week at the CCAs:  On Thursday, NMCCA will hear oral argument in United States v. McMurrin.  Here are the issues being argued:

I. WHETHER APPELLANT’S CONVICTION FOR NEGLIGENT HOMICIDE UNDER ARTICLE 134, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 934 (2006), AS A LESSER INCLUDED OFFENSE OF INVOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER UNDER ARTICLE 119, UCMJ, VIOLATES THE REQUIREMENTS OF DUE PROCESS AND ARTICLE 79, UCMJ.  See United States v. Jones, 68 M.J. 465 (C.A.A.F. 2010), United States v. Burleson, __ M.J. __, No. 09-258/NA (C.A.A.F. 18 May 2010). See also United States v. Riley, 58 M.J. 305, 311-12 (C.A.A.F. 2003), United States v. Martinez, 42 M.J. 327, 330 (C.A.A.F. 1995).

II. WHETHER THE APPELLANT’S ACTS OR OMISSIONS: (1) AMOUNTED TO SIMPLE NEGLIGENCE, AND (2) PLAYED A MATERIAL ROLE IN MMFR STEPHENS’ DEATH.

(Someone in the Navy help me out with this one.  Is an “MMFR” a Machinist’s Mate Fireman Recruit?)

12 Responses to “Next week in military justice”

  1. RY says:

    Seems to me the first issue is an easy one – no Article 134 offense is an LIO of an enumerated offense post-Jones. What’s complicated is what happens next.

  2. Mike "No Man" Navarre says:

    Bingo. Sometimes the acronymn is no easier to use than the words themselves.

  3. Late Bloomer says:

    What SHOULD happen next is that NMCCA sets aside the conviction. It will be interesting to see if the government tries to argue that there is no double-jeopardy protection and they attempt to re-try him.

  4. Anonymous says:

    We (the Navy) also own the longest acronym, ADCOMSUBORDCOMPHIBSPAC, which, according to Wikipedia, refers to “Administrative Command, Amphibious Forces, Pacific Fleet Subordinate Command.”

  5. Snuffy says:

    I am often confused by the habit in the navy of stringing together the first three or four letters on the words in a name- that really isnt an acronym- is it?

  6. Late Bloomer says:

    On a slightly tangential note, has anyone ever noticed how un-original US operational codenames can be? Contrast US codenames with those of say, the UK, and we look like total dweebs.

  7. Law Student says:

    Re: Snuffy–Coming from the Air Force and marrying into the Navy, that has struck me as quite possibly the Navy’s most confounding practice!

  8. Anon says:

    You really haven’t arrived in Navy Acronym Land until you are able to embed acronyms within acronyms!

  9. Anonymous says:

    Yes, like the sub force started using one many years ago – ARCI – Acoustic Rapid COTS Insertion; COTS – Commercial Off The Shelf.

  10. Random Thought says:

    It looks like it’s not just the Navy anymore – one of my favorite examples is CCMRF (pronounced “seesmurf”) = CBRNE Consequence Management Response Force. CBRNE (pronounced “seebernie”)= Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear and High Yield Explosive

  11. Cloudesley Shovell says:

    I strongly suspect that the Navy love affair with acronyms and shortened word groups (ComNavAirPac, BuPers, etc) originated in communications, and are a direct result of the extremely limited bandwidth traditionally available.

    Navy ships, even today, communicate w/signal flags, which suffer from extremely low bandwidth. Thus, a system of short codes developed, some of which persist in everyday Navy speech. BZ (bravo zulu) is but one example, meaning “job well done.” Some old Navy farts like me will also recognize EX 3-4, among others.

    Light gun signaling and first-generation radio with morse code was only slightly better, still with very little bandwidth. Codes and abbreviations persisted.

    Even up through the late 80’s and early 90’s, much Navy message traffic was transmitted via coded radio transmissions, and printed out via teletype. Radio was necessary because there was, until recently, no other way to communicate w/ships at sea. Giant antenna farms used for communicating w/Navy ships and stations around the world were a once a common sight on coastlines near Navy bases. The relatively recent transition to high-bandwidth encrypted satellite comms and various internet-like military comm networks means that the contractions and acronyms are no longer compelled by bandwidth issues. They persist anyway because it’s human nature to shorten things up. Just look at all the acronyms and abbreviations used in text messages, email, twitter, etc.

    This old radio-teletype system is why one still, to this day, sees message traffic printed out in all caps (ugh), with a date-time-group identifier, FM, TO, INFO addresses, MSGID, and all that. Things may be changing, however, see NAVADMIN 249/10.

    The bandwidth limitations of old transmission systems and subsequent use of acronyms persists in other fields. Aviation weather is one example. For example, the most recent weather for the Savannah, Georgia, airport is:
    KSAV 280053Z 30003KT 7SM FU SCT049CB SCT070 BKN085 28/25 A3006 RMK AO2 SLP178 FRQ LTGIC NW-N CB NW-N MOV S FU ON AIRFIELD T02830250

    And you thought the Navy was bad. FU=smoke, which makes sense if you speak French.

  12. Hodge says:

    GAD filed it’s response (70 pages or so) on the 21st in the Behenna case.

    Now waiting on appellant’s reply brief.