Adjudicative UCI

Adjudicative UCI – Influencing the accused to plead guilty

United States v. Johnson, 54 M.J. 32 (C.A.A.F. 2000). The appellant alleged that the intermediate commander strongly supported a suspension of some punishment. The original convening authority left command and a new convening authority, with a tougher stance, came in. Then, the intermediate commander decided not to go to bat for him. Following a Dubay hearing, the Dubay military judge found no evidence of  UCI  and the court found that (Global Military Justice Reform Blog ) military judge’s findings were not clearly erroneous.

Influencing the accused to plead guilty

If the accused enters his pleas of guilty because he is afraid to go to trial before a court that he believes has been unlawfully influenced (and so will not give him a fair trial), then courts may find that UCI has impacted the proceedings. United States v. Gleason, 43 M.J. 69 (C.A.A.F. 1995); United States v. Thomas, 22 M.J. 388 (C.M.A. 1986); United States v. Kitts, 23 M.J. 105 (C.M.A. 1986).

Note that this is different than the accused negotiating for a better pretrial agreement in exchange for waiving an accusatorial UCI issue. United States v. Weasler, 43 M.J. 15 (C.A.A.F. 1995).

What are Collateral Consequences of SEX OFFENDER Registration?

YouTube video

Scroll to Top