Sign up to save your podcasts
Or
Share CAAF: United States v. Voorhees, No. 18-0372/AF
Share to email
Share to Facebook
Share to X
Share to email
Share to Facebook
Share to X
Or
CAAF: United States v. Voorhees, No. 18-0372/AF
Argued on February 21, 2019
Issues:
I. Whether the AFCCA erred in finding no plain error despite trial counsel’s argument on findings that personally attacked appellant and trial defense counsel, commented on Appellant’s silence, expressed his personal opinions, bolstered his own credibility, vouched for government witnesses, speculated, and made reference to facts not in evidence.
II. Whether the AFCCA erred in finding that the specifications alleging violations of Article 133, UCMJ, stated an offense despite the fact that they lack words of criminality or a mens rea.
III. Whether plain error occurred when the military judge failed to instruct the members that mens rea was an element of an offense under Article 133.
http://www.caaflog.com/category/october-2018-term/united-states-v-voorhees/
Note: Audio post-processed for this podcast with a dynamic normalizer filter.
View all episodes
By CAAFlogArgued on February 21, 2019
Issues:
I. Whether the AFCCA erred in finding no plain error despite trial counsel’s argument on findings that personally attacked appellant and trial defense counsel, commented on Appellant’s silence, expressed his personal opinions, bolstered his own credibility, vouched for government witnesses, speculated, and made reference to facts not in evidence.
II. Whether the AFCCA erred in finding that the specifications alleging violations of Article 133, UCMJ, stated an offense despite the fact that they lack words of criminality or a mens rea.
III. Whether plain error occurred when the military judge failed to instruct the members that mens rea was an element of an offense under Article 133.
http://www.caaflog.com/category/october-2018-term/united-states-v-voorhees/
Note: Audio post-processed for this podcast with a dynamic normalizer filter.