Rule essentially adopts the DuBay “hearing” concept but it expands the jurisdictionof the MJ into post-trial proceedings. Article 39(a) requires that “these proceedings shall be conducted in the presence of the accused.” See also United States v. Caruth , 6 M.J. 184 (C.M.A. 1979) (holding that a post-action hearing held in accused’s absence found “improper and . . . not a part of the record of trial”)
