and the 

JUDGE ADVOCATE GENER

of the 

ARMED FORCES 


and the 

GENERAL COUNSEL 

of the 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPOR

PURSUANT TO THE 


UNIFORM CODE OF MILITARY JU

For the Period 


October 1, 1978-September 30, 1

PROPERTY OF U.S.ARtIf 

THE JUDGEADVOCATE GENERAL'S S

LiBRARY 

and to the 


SECRETARY OF DEFENS

AND SECRETARY OF TRANSPOR

and the 


SECRETARIES OF TIE DEPARTMENTS 

ARMY. NAVY. AND AIR FORCE 

PURSUANT TO TIE 


UNIFORM CODE OF MILITARY ,UST

For the Period 


October I. 1978-September 30. 197
REPORT OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF MILITARY A

REPORT OF THE JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL OF THE A

REPORT OF THE JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL OF THE N

REPORT OF THE JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL OF THE A

REPORT OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL OF THE DEPAR

TRANSPORTATION (UNITED STATES COAST GUARD
JUDGE ADVOCATES GENERA

OF THE ARMED FORCES 


and the 


GENERAL COUNSEL, 


DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTAT

October 1,1978 to September 30, 

The judges of the U.S. Court of Military Appea

vocates General of the military departments, and t

sel of the Department of Transportation submit the

on the operation of the Uniform Code of Military 

to 10 U.S.C. §867(g). 

The Code Committee, consisting of the indivi

above, continued its tradition of meeting quarterly 

year to review developments in the field of milita

consider proposals designed to improve the oper

form Code of Military Justice. 

Perhaps the most significant accomplishment d

the Code Committee's review and approval of the 

Evidence, which subsequently were promulgated 

pursuant to his rule-making authority under Artic

form Code. The Military Rules of Evidence closel

eral Rules of Evidence, upon which they were pat

will take effect on September 1, 1980. 

The Code Committee also devoted substantial e

development of a philosophy for proposing future 

Congress. In addition, the committee reviewed 

proposed amendments to Articles 2 and 36 of th

Most of the Code Committee members subsequen

cerning this legislation before the Military Personn
would restrict the candor and free interaction among t

which was believed essential to accomplish the legislativ

which were set by the Congress for the committee. Co

Freedom of Information Act, the committee agreed to re

of available minutes to interested parties despite its co

the Freedom of Information Act does not mandate such 

action. 

Separate reports of the U.S. Court of Military App

individual services address further items of particula

the Committees on Armed Services of the U. S. Senate a

Representatives as well as the Secretaries of Defense, 

tion, Army, Navy, and Air Force. 

ROBINSON O. EVERETT, 

Chief Judge. 

WILLIAM H. COOK, 

Associate Judge. 

ALBERT B. FLETCHER, JR., 

Associate Judge. 

ALTON H. HARVEY, 

The Judge Advocate General, U.S. Ar

CHARLES E. McDoWELL 

The Judge Advocate General, U.S. Na

WALTER D. REED 

The Judge Advocate General, U.S. A

LINDA HELLER KAMM, 

General Counsel, Department of Tran

2 
their FY 1979 report on the administration of the Cou

justice to the Committees on Armed Services of the 

Senate and House of Representatives and the Secr

fense, Transportation, Army, Navy, and Air Force, 

with Article 67 (g), Uniform Code of Military Justi

§867(g). 

THE BUSINESS OF THE COURT 

During the 1979 term, the Court acted on 1,487 peti

of review, granting review in 129 cases (9%). On the 

of mandatory appeals, certificates, and granted petitio

acted in 336 cases, affirming the Courts of Military R

of those cases. The master docket cases were decide

opinions, 40 per curiam opinions and 208 summary dis

Court also acted upon 76 cases on the miscellaneous 

ing relief in one case. At the close of the term, 29

pending on the petition docket and subject to the sta

review rule; 202 cases were pending on the master 

cases were pending on the miscellaneous docket. Alth

tions lagged slightly behind filings on the petition do

tive terminations widely outpaced cumulative filin

largest decrease in backlog occurring in cases on the m

A more detailed analysis of the business of the Cour

term accompanies this report. 

The workload of the Court continues to be signifi

than the workload experienced in the 11 United Sta

Appeals. While the Director of the Administrative 

United States Court's Management Statistics for 

Courts, 1979, credits each of the 323 three-judge 

courts of appeals with 626 appeals filed, 287 appeals te

555 pending appeals, the comparable overall workloa
JUDGE PERRY RESIGNS 

Judge Matthew J. Perry resigned on September 22, 

to accept an appointment as a United States District J

District of South Carolina. Judge Perry had served 

since February 18, 1976. Judge Perry's resignation ma

ond time in less than 6 years that a judge of this Cour

to resign to accept a federal district judgeship. 

SAFEGUARDING THE RIGHT TO PETITION THE 

Petitions which lacked facial timeliness were offer

during this term by 58 individual appellants seeking re

respective Court of Military Review decisions. Thes

untimely petitions prompted the issuance of show cau

the Court to determine whether the petitions should b

dismissed as being out of time. An additional 11 petiti

subject of various motions raising a similar issue co

timeliness of filing of each such petition. Inquiry into 

stances of each case revealed some confusion regardin

priateness of the advice given by the various military s

accused whose court-martial conviction has been revi

firmed by one of the Courts of Military Review concern

to petition the United States Court of Military Appea

appellate review. The problem appeared to be more 

cases in which a military accused had been permitt

home on leave pending completion of appellate revi

service officials met with the Court Executive and C

and successfully designed corrective administrative 

eliminate the problem and to assure future complia

Court's rules. 

4 
Judge Perry visited the Marine Corps Base, Quanti

May. During the preceding December, he visited 

burg, and Rhein-Main Air Force Bases, Germany; V

fantry Division, U.S. Army Europe, and the Ber

Frankfurt, Wurzburg, Heidelberg, and Berlin, as w

and naval facilities in the United Kingdom. 

The judges also appeared by invitation of Congres

cerning several bills affecting military justice. In a

request of the American Bar Association Standing 

Military Law, Judges Fletcher and Cook both appe

Committee to present their views on statutory refo

the U.S. Court of Military Appeals. 

The judges welcome these opportunities to meet 

ers, military lawyers and others involved in the ad

military justice both to present and to receive views 

operation on the military justice system and to addre

modifications in the Uniform Code of Military Justic

APPELLATE ADVOCACY CONFEREN

Under the sponsorship of the United States Court 

peals in conjunction with the Military Law Institu

Annual Homer Ferguson Conference on Appellate 

held at the Georgetown University Law Center on M

The conference featured a number of distinguished 

Judge Edward D. Re of the U.S. Customs Court, sp

late Brief Writing." Chief Judge Re is the author of 

treatises on appellate advocacy entitled, "Brief W

Argument." Professor George S. Prugh of the Hast

Law, University of California and formerly the J

General of the Army, discussed extraordinary writ 

military appellate courts. Eugene R. Fidell, Esquire

subject of appellate practice and procedure. Mr. Fid
Over two hundred uniformed and civilian appellate la

ticing before the Courts of Military Review and this Co

as the Judges of the Courts of Military Review and thi

Judge Advocates General of the various services, and ot

and commentators in the field of military justice, were in 

at the conference. Videotapes of the conference proc

available on loan from the Clerk's Office and were prov

American Bar Association for use at its annual meeting

USCMA MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYST

With excellent results, the Court continued to utili

mated information system to monitor the status of pendi

prepare all routine orders and notices, and to provide 

and staff with timely management reports. The sys

utilized to monitor all of the Court's requisitions as 

Court's budget, personnel matters, the word processin

eration, and extraordinary writs and motions. It also pr

port for the Homer Ferguson Conference, the Code Com

certain Congressional projects of interest to the Court. 

During fiscal year 1979, the Court Executive, R. W

also presented lectures on the Court's automated infor

tem in seminars sponsored by the Institute for Court M

and the National Conference of Appellate Court Clerks. 

over 50 state and federal agencies toured the Court's fa

a view toward implementing automated information s

terned on the Court of Military Appeals' model. The b

design also has served as a model for a number of feder

appellate courts as well as several U.S. Attorney's office

country. Within the past six months, the Fourth, Fifth

Circuits all have implemented systems patterned on th

this Court. 

Because of the data processing and statistical limita

present system and the minimal amount of on-line stora

6 
data processing needs of the Court of Military App

could provide support to the four Courts of Military R

they perceive such a need. The Court continues to se

solutions to difficult judicial administration problem

utilization of modern technology to improve caseflow w

viding the judges with the most thorough analysis of 

possible. 

CENTRAL LEGAL STAFF COMMITTEE 

As one of the first appellate courts in the country to 

tral legal staff, the Court is especially proud that o

attorneys, Carol Wild Scott, was elected chairperson o

Committee of Appellate Court Staff Counsel. This 

supported by the Appellate Judges Conference of the 

Association Judicial Administration Division, provide

the dissemination of 'information concerning utilizat

sional staff in the appellate court environment while a

a vehicle for the exchange of technological and profes

mutual interest. Central legal staffs now are in use in 

circuit court as well as in intermediate courts and cou

sort in 26 states. 

SIGNIFICANT DECISIONS AFFECTING THE ADMIN

OF MILITARY JUSTICE WITHIN THE ARMED F

Court-martial practice and procedure: pretrial confinem

tion of the court-martial panel; record of trial; writt

*This section of the Court's Annual Report is prepared solely as 

tool by the staff of the Court. It is included for the convenience 

assist in easily locating cases of particular interest during the 

summaries are of no precedential value and should not be cited in 

the Court. 
a magistrate's receipt of exparte communications of ne

ered evidence without an opportunity for the accused o

respond. 

In reviewing a court-martial in which only 6 of 10 m

tailed by the convening authority were present for th

trial, the Court held that it was error for the military ju

tinue with the trial without notifying the convening au

securing approval for the absence of the court member

error did not affect the underlying jurisdiction of the co

the error was fundamental, and the failure of the defen

did not amount to waiver. The Court held that a volun

gent waiver would have required the military judge to d

the accused his rights concerning panel membership. U

v. Colon, 6 M.J. 73 (C.M.A. 1978). 

In a case in which the accused was tried before a mil

where the written request for trial by judge alone in

contained the accused's name on the form rather than 

the military judge, the Court refused to find jurisdict

overturning former caselaw to the contrary, starting w

States v. Brown, 21 U.S.C.M.A. 516, 45 C.M.R. 290 (19

States v. Stearman, 7 M.J. 13 (C. M.A. 1979). 

During the term, the Court had the opportunity to cl

fective date of implementing the decision in United Stat

1 M.J. 453 (C.M.A. 1976)), with respect to the inquiry w

tary judge must make into the existence of a pretrial agr

guilty plea case. Because of confusion which may have 

Court announced it would not set aside any guilty plea

to comply with Green prior to October 17, 1977, the 

decision in United States v. King, 3 M.J. 458 (C.M.A. 

clarified the mandatory nature of the Green decision. 

In a trial before a military judge alone in which pleas o

been accepted by the military judge, after the accused 

withdrew the guilty pleas upon learning that the pretria

tion under Article 32, UCMJ, contained knowingly uns

8 
acalle, 4 M.J. 181 (C.M.A. 1978), concerning the use o

of general deterrence as a factor in sentencing. In 

opinion, the Court held that counsel for the prosecuti

ing may not argue to the court members for a s

primarily on the general deterrence of others. 

The procedures by which a suspended sentence is 

under scrutiny in United States v. Hurd, 7 M.J. 18 (

The Court refused to accept documents created after 

was vacated in fulfillment of the constitutional requir

convening authority reduce to writing the evidence a

vacating the suspended sentence. Moreover, the d

supporting the vacation action is not sufficient if it m

a synopsis of the evidence of the suspension-break

staff judge advocate's opinion that the evidence is suf

rant vacation of the. suspended sentence, and the sta

cate's recommendation that the suspended sentence b

convening authority's vacation proceedings must be s

detailed statement of the evidence as well as the re

suspension was being vacated. 

In a case certified by the Judge Advocate General 

United States v. Banks, 7 M.J. 92 (C. M.A. 1979), 

occasion to review the continued need for a rule requ

of charges for the failure of the convening authority 

action within 90 days after a trial is completed when 

serving in post-trial confinement pursuant to the cou

tence. The Court announced that it would no longer r

ble application of the rule in Dunlap v. Convening 

U.S.C.M.A. 135,48 C.M.R. 751 (1974). The Court rea

need for the Dunlap rule has not survived the evo

doctrine in such cases as United States v. Paleni

(C.M.A. 1977), defining and clarifying the nature of 

sentation after trial, and United States v. Brown

(C.M.A. 1979), decided this term, which outlined 

available to a convening authority in denying applic
pg

court-marital jurisdiction over persons during the ter

States v. Hudson, 5 M.J. 413 (C.M.A. 1978), the Cou

action which the government must take in order to h

national guardsman serving on active duty under self

ders which would automatically terminate active statu

time. When criminal investigators formally charged 

after questioning and obtaining handwriting samples w

tions and the company commander placed the accused 

by imposing restraints upon his freedom of movemen

unquestionably severe, these actions effectively at

martial jurisdiction prior to the date of the schedu

nonactive status. 

The Court also construed regulations governing the 

persons attempting to avoid civilian prosecution. Whe

cused's parent and civilian lawyer initiated a propos

service as an alternative to prosecution, notwithstan

ulations of the armed services prohibit enlistment u

cumstances and characterize such a disqualification as 

since the disqualification is neither mandated by st

structive of a matter inherent in the substance of t

contract, the contract will not be voided in the absen

tive steps by the enlisted person to disavow the enlis

the commission of an offense. Consequently, the Co

extend United States v. Catlow, 23 U.S.C.M.A. 142,4

(1974), to void not only an involuntary, coerced enlist

civilian incarceration but also an enlistment merely in 

nonwaivable regulatory disqualification. The Court al

extend the holding of United States v. Russo, 1 M.J

1975), beyond voiding enlistment contracts where a 

listed in violation of Article 84, UCMJ. Where not a 

of a criminal statute designed to preserve the integr

listment process, but simple negligence on the part of 

enlisting a recruit who had not attained a satisfactor

entrance test is involved, relief from court-martial ju

10 
1978). In the final jurisdictional case of the term, 

Torres, 7 M.J. 104 (C.M.A. 1979), the Court hel

recruiter misconduct survived a two-step enlistm

which a recruit was brought first into the Marin

with the intention that he would shortly thereaf

the Regular Marine Corps. Upon an accused's c

initially recruited in violation of regulations which 

enlistment by reason of his self-disclosure of mari

circumstance that the recruiter misconduct of the f

unknown to the second recruiter does not lessen 

burden to establish a valid enlistment in the first 

Service-connected offenses 

The 1978-1979 term had several important opi

fming service connection in off-post offenses. In 

Clink, 5 M.J. 404 (C.M.A. 1978), the Court exami

of proximity betw~en the situs of an off-base marih

a nearby military installation. Even though the s

munity where the offenses occurred was surrounde

military installation, the Court ruled that const

connection cannot be established solely on the basi

such would disregard the political boundary bet

and military communities. In another case involvi

by an officer in the company of enlisted militar

Court declined to find service connection merely 

ticipants in the incident were military policemen, o

cused was a superior officer to the enlisted peopl

*It should be noted that, at the close of the term, Congress 

designed to specifically overrule portions of United States v

(C.M.A. 1975). On November 9, 1979, the President signed 

96-107 which significantly amended both Articles 2 and 36 of 

Milita~ Justice. 
residence, the Court found service connection in the re

stolen property onto the military base, holding that the 

aspect of the larceny was not completed until after the p

been brought onto the military installation. After first 

find service connection in United States v. McCollum, 

(C.M.A. 1979), for an off-base sale of marihuana where 

demonstrated the conspiracy to sell was formulated on b

on-base conspiracy was not pleaded or proved, the Cou

its approach in United States v. Strangstalien, 7 M.J. 2

1979), where a different majority of the Court found an o

to be service connected because the formation of the 

agreement occurred on base even though the conspira

charged. Lastly, service connection was found in an off

action in prohibited substances where it was clear th

stances were to be returned to a barracks for further 

United States v. Chambers, 7 M.J. 24 (C.M.A. 1979). 

Courts of Military Review: extraordinary relief available 

to prosecution 

The Court granted two petitions filed under Rule 3(b

Court's Rules of Practice and Procedure, to review decis

Air Force Court of Military Review which granted ex

relief on applications by the Government to set aside 

military judge which dismissed the charges against ea

The Court held the Courts of Military Review possess 

to entertain and, in appropriate cases, to grant petiti

traordinary relief· filed by the Government which seek to 

inferior court to a lawful exercise of its prescribed jurisd

Court ruled, however, that no grounds existed for issu

extraordinary writ by the Air Force Court of Military 

either of these cases, since the petitions were, in effect, 

authorized by Congress under the Uniform Code of Milit

Dettinger v. United States, 7 M.J. 216 (C.M.A. 1979). 

12 
the interrogation nor furnishing information resulti

terrogation constitutes participation in the interrog

require the full panoply of preinterrogation warning

civilian or foreign police are not acting as an instru

military authorities, they are not obliged to compl

requirements applicable to United States military 

United States v. Jones, 6 M.J. 226 (C. M.A. 1979). 

ing a claim that a warning of the rights against s

under Article 31, UCMJ, was required the Court 

31 warnings need not be given to an accused at the 

mitigation hearing prior to the imposition of senten

matters that might give rise to a charge being la

crime. United States v. Mathews, 6 M.J. 357 (C.M.

Right to counsel: post-trial duties, substitution of cou

and severance ~f attorney-client relationship 

The duties of trial defense counsel continue after 

receiving service of the staff judge advocate's post-

Court ruled. Even when the review is prepared in 

diction, the original trial defense counsel must be 

review. United States v. Iverson, 5 M.J. 440 (C. M

related case, the Court resolved several other post

sues. Although substitute defense counsel may be 

original trial defense counsel has left the service

lawyer may not act in the case unless he enters i

client relationship with the accused. United States 

451 (C. M.A. 1978). The Court approved the s

attorney-client relationship prior to trial when 

lawyer assumed duties as a military judge. The 

Code of Judicial Conduct directing that a judge sho

law has been adopted as policy by the Marine 

Courts-Martial Judiciary. This policy constituted go

minate the officer's duties as defense counsel, once 
1978). However, the Court made clear that it was within 

tion of the trial judge to determine whether the witnes

pear in person or whether justice could be guaranteed b

ternative form of testimony. [d. at 432. In United Stat

berledge, 6 M.J. 203 (C. M.A. 1979), the Court addressed 

of the denial of defense access to prosecution witnesse

involving the safe-keeping of prosecution witnesses, t

ment must be careful to provide access to them by defen

for it is not counsel but others who threaten the witness

Search and Seizure 

During the term, the Court confirmed the power of a c

officer to authorize searches and seizures within the com

based upon constitutional probable cause. Rejecting cl

commander is per se disqualified as a neutral and detatc

trate, the Court held that a commander can exercise 

Amendment warrant function so long as the commande

qualified because of undertaking law-enforcement activ

case, such as using informants, drug-detection dogs, con

chases of drugs, or surveillance operations. However, w

mander not only initiates a search but selects the time a

the search and participates in it personally, such a comm

not be a neutral and detached magistrate with respec

search. United States v. Ezell, 6 M.J. 307 (C.M.A. 1979

Substantive Offenses: negligent homicide and Comprehen

Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970 

An attack on the use of the general article to punish ho

to simple negligence was rejected in United States v. K

82 (C. M.A. 1979). Citing early precedents under the Un

of Military Justice which affirmed negligent homicide 

and rejecting an argument that all homicide offenses 

preempted by Articles 118 and 119, UCMJ, the Court di

14 
service member with wrongful possession of marihuan

to distribute under the provisions of the Compreh

Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970, 21 U.S.C

Despite the lack of a provision making it extraterritoria

cation, the Court held that the offense was properl

having taken place aboard a naval vessel underway in 

ranean Sea. A vessel of the United States is an ext

territory of the United States, especially when the ve

ship. United States v. Collins, 7 M.J. 188 (C.M.A. 197

distinguished caselaw which had denied court-mar

matter jurisdiction over statutury offenses in forei

where the underlying statute failed to provide for ex

application. 

ROBINSON O. EV

Chief Judge 

.WILLIAM H. COO

\ 

Judge 

ALBERT B. FLE

Judge 
Petitions for grant of review filed. . . . . . . . . . . 1,513 

Extraordinary writs sought. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 

Reconsideration filings granted .............. 1 

TOTAL ................................ 1,598 


CUMULATIVE TERMINATIONS 

Master Docket ............................. 336 

Petition Docket. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,358 

Miscellaneous Docket ....................... 76 

TOTAL 1,770 

CUMULATIVE END PENDING 

Master Docket ............................. 202 

Petition Docket. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 299 

Miscellaneous Docket ....................... 6 

TOTAL..... ........ ... ... ... ... ...... ..... 507 


OPINION SUMMARY 

CATEGORY SIGNED PER CURIAM MEMIORD

MASTER DOCKET.............. 88 40 208 

PETITION DOCKET. . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 0 1,358 

MISCELLANEOUS DOCKET ....__0____0____7_6

TOTAL ......................... 88 40 1,642 

FILINGS (MASTER DOCKET) 

Appeals f'!led ......_. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Certificates f'!led. .. .. ......... ... ... . .. ..... 

Petitions granted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Reconsideration granted. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

0 

14 

128 

1 

TOTAL.................................... 143 

TERMINATIONS (MASTER DOCKET) 

Findings and sentence affirmed .... . 235 

Reversed in whole or in part ....... . 89 Signed ......

Granted petitions vacated .... : .... . 10 Per curiam ..

Other disposition directed ......... . 2 Mem opnJord

TOTAL .......................... . 336 TOTAL .....

16 
TERMINATIONS (PETITION DOCKET) 

Petitions for grant dismissed ..... . 17 

Petitions for grant denied ........ . 1,328 Signed ..

Petitions for grant remanded ..... . 8 Per curia

Petitions for grant withdrawn .... . 5 Mem opnJ

TOTAL ........................ . 1,358 TOT

PENDING (PETITION DOCKET) 

Petition briefs pending. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172 

Staff attorney action pending ................ 77 

Court action pending. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 

TOTAL... .... ........ ...... ....... ........ 299 


FILINGS (MISCELLANEOUS DOCKET) 

Writs of error coram nobis sought. . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 

Writs of habeas corpus sought ................ 18 

Writs of mandamus/prohibition sought . . . . . . . . . 28 

Other extraordinary writs sought ............. 22 

TOTAL..................................... 70 


TERMINATIONS (MISCELLANEOUS DOCKET) 

Petitions withdrawn. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 

Petitions remanded. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 

Petitions granted. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Signed

Petitions denied. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 Per curia

Petitions dismissed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Mem opn

TOTAL........................... 76 TOTAL

PENDING (MISCELLANEOUS DOCKET) 

Briefs pending .............................. 1 

Action by Writs Counsel pending ............ 2 

Show cause action by Court pending ......... 0 

Show cause response pending. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 

Other final action pending . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 

TOTAL ..................................... 6 

18 
In fiscal year 1979 Major General Alton H. Harv

duties of The Judge Advocate General and Major G

Clausen assumed the duties of The Assistant Judge 

eral. Additionally, Brigadier General Hugh R. Ov

the duties of Assistant Judge Advocate General f

and Brigadier General Richard J. Bednar assumed t

sistant Judge Advocate General for Civil Law. 

During this reporting period the Office of The 

General continued to monitor the proceedings of co

review and prepare military justice publications a

and to develop draft legislative changes for the UC

MILITARY JUSTICE STATISTICS AND 

ARMY JUDICIARY ACTIVITIES 


The military justice system continued to experie

the number of courts-martial Army-wide during f

The total number of persons tried by all types of 

fiscal year 1979 was 1.4% lower than the year be

convicted 1.14% lower. The figures for fiscal year 1

decline in persons tried and a 5.3% decline in per

from the prior year. 

The total number of Article 15's imposed during 

decreased from that of fiscal year 1978 by 5.2%. In 

there were 146,411 Article 15's imposed, or app

times the total number of courts-martial tried. In 

there were 154,410 Article 15's imposed, approxim

the total number of courts-martial tried during that 

A factor which contributed to the decline in th

rate was the continued use of administrative proced

service members who were in trouble or likely to co

with military criminal law. Procedures under Ch

Regulation 635-200, were used to separate soldie
20 
TOI'AL 

TOI'AL~~~~ ~ OVER NUMBER OF CASES 

REVIEWED 1.1% 

PART 5· APPELLATE COUNSEL REOUESTS BEFORE CO

REVIEW 

NUMB'" 1575 :.:.:.::: :.:.;.:.:.: :::, ::::::.:.:.:.:.:.: .:.:.:-:.:.:.::::::: .:.:.:.:.'........ :.:.:.:.: ))

"pe"'A"'c"'e-=-""-T-A-G-e---+---=-::9-79-.-:-4":"%--1 :::::: :::::::.. ::.::.:::~~~:::':':':: :::}}.:: .:::}}::(::::::.:

PART 6· U. S. COURT OF MILITARY APPEALS ACTIONS 

PERCENTAGE OF .A(}.t;. REVIEWED CASES FORWARDED TO USCMA 

PERCENTAGE OF DECREASE (-) OVER PREVIOUS REPORTING PERIOD 

PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL PETITIONS GRANTED 

PERCENTAGE OF DECREASE (-) OVER PREVIOUS REPORTING PERIOD 

PERCENTAGE OF PETITIONS GRANTED OF TOTAL CASES REVIEWED BY AQ1R 

RATE OF DECREASE (-, OVER THE NUMBER OF CASES REVIEweo OURING 

LAST REPORTING PERIOD 
PART 9 - COMPLAINTS UNDER ARTICLE 138 

NUMBER OF COMPLAINTS REel D BY ar.rild 68 

PART10-STRENGTH 

AVERAGE ACTIVE DUTY STRENGTH I 758,748 

22 
U.S. Army Trial Defense Service 

In May 1978, the U.S. Army Trial Defense Service 

organization of military defense counsel, began a o

sixteen installations of the U.S. Army Training and 

mand. Initiated at the direction of the Chief of Staff

designed, in part, to counter perceptions that defens

be subjected to divided loyalties by assignment to 

authority's command. 

The primary mission of USA TDS is to provide sp

counsel services at the installation level. USA TDS 

sent soldiers in all judicial and administrative action

is an entitlement to legal counsel by law or regula

give advice to soldiers offered nonjudicial punishm

pects, as required by law. Secondary USATDS mis

at improving the professionalism and efficiency of d

After a year of testing, USATDS was evaluated b

vening authorities, staff judge advocates, milita

counsel at the sixteen installations. Based upon tho

USA TDS was an operational success. Commanders 

quently on the high degree of professionalism exhib

counsel. Most felt the program would help cure wh

pressions of unlawful influence lingered within the 

system. Military judges found the courtroom perfor

ance and bearing, and overall professionalism of def

have greatly improved under USATDS. 

The successful test results led the Army Chief of 

to a recommendation from The Judge Advocate Ge

further testing of USATDS, beginning 1 Septemb

Army installations in the continental United S

Hawaii, and Panama. Implementation of USATDS 

year 1980 in U.S. Army Europe and Eighth U.S. Ar

projected. 

Under the overall supervision of the Assistant J

General for Civil Law, USATDS has a five-man he
p

supervision continues to provide the requisite supervisi

and evaluation of defense counsel necessary to enh

sionalism and promote the effective use of resources. 

SIGNIFICANT MILITARY JUSTICE ACTIO

Actions involving military justice handled by the C

Division, OTJAG, included evaluating and drafting 

Executive Orders, pamphlets, and regulations impacti

eration of the Army and the Department of Defense; m

administration of military justice, including evaluation 

major projects; rendering opinions for the Army staff; 

ing various aspects of criminal cases for action by the 

tariat and staff. 

Change To Military Justice Regulation 

Change 18, Army Regulation 27-10, Military Justic

lished with an effective date of 1 March 1979. Some o

cant changes included: providing for a mental status 

accused referred to trial by general or BCD special c

incorporating the designation by the Secretary of the 

Judge Advocate General as the authority next superior 

appeals when no intermediate superior authority is 

available; incorporating revised DA Form 2627 (Re

ceedings under Article 15, UCMJ); adding formulas for 

maximum authorized monthly forfeitures and deten

under Article 15, UCMJ; updating the informational r

various restrictions as to membership of courts-marti

related military justice duties; and conforming the Adv

pellate Rights and the Petition for Grant of Review 

current rules of the U.S. Court of Military Appeals. 

Immediate Action Interim Change No. 102, Army 

27-10 was published with an effective date of 1 Septem

24 
punishment is administered for an offense, comma

prerogative of filing the original in unit records 

OMPF. Commanders exercising special court-martia

thority determine filing in cases of enlisted, perso

E1-E5. Commanders exercising general court-ma

authority determine filing in cases of enlisted pe

grades E6-E9, warrant officers, and officers. Minor 

defined as restriction or extra duty for 14 days or le

forfeiture of pay to be applied for not more than one 

tional custody for seven days or less, admonition or 

any combination thereof. 

FOREIGN CRIMINAL JURISDICTIO

As executive agent for DOD, DA (through OTJAG

collates information concerning the exercise of fo

jurisdiction over U.S. service members. During th

cember 1978 through 30 November 1979 out o

(worldwide) involving primary foreign concurrent 

U.S. Army personnel, foreign authorities waived th

in 16,478 cases for a waiver rate of 98.6 percent. Thi

cal to that of the previous reporting period. 

LITIGATION 

Litigation involving the Army during fiscal year 

limited impact upon military justice matters. 

In Cowden v. United States, 600 F.2d 1354 (Ct. 

tiff, who had served beyond his period of enlistme

general court-martial sentence which was invalidate

pay for the period between the expiration of his term 

the date he was released from military control. H

from military control after it was decided not to ord
cuting sodomy between persons of the same sex, while 

prosecute similar acts between persons of different sexe

trict court granted summary judgment for the United S

out opinion. 

In Piper v. Alexander, Civ. No. C-78-2203 SW (N.D. 

plaintiff sought to set aside an Article 15 on the ground t

15 is jurisdictionally limited to minor offenses and the 

which he was punished were major felonies. The actio

missed on 12 October 1979 without opinion. 

EDUCATION AND TRAINING 

During fiscal year 1979, The Judge Advocate Gene

(TJAGSA) provided legal education to lawyers of the mi

ices and other federal agencies. Forty-three resident co

conducted with 2,141 students in attendance. Course

tended by 1,360 Army, 136 Navy and Marine, 115 Ai

Coast Guard, 29 Army National Guard, 15 Air National 

civilians, and 11 foreign students. 

Courses of Instruction 

During fiscal year 1979, three Basic Classes, the 88-

conducted. A total of 235 officers-231 Army, and fou

were graduated. 

The 28th Graduate Class began on 20 August 1979 wit

two Navy, five Marine, and three foreign officers in atte

In November 1978, three instructors from TJAGSA p

in the first Pre-Command Course at Fort Leavenwor

Fifty-five battalion and brigade command designees at

initial offering. Additional Pre-Command Courses wer

January, March, May, July, and September 1979. In e

three TJAGSA instructors gave twenty-two hours of ins

administrative adverse actions and criminal law. In all, 3

attended the six Pre-Command Courses. 

26 
y y 

subj ect along the full spectrum of anti-terrorist pla

sponse in which judge advocates might become invol

mary purpose of the course was to train judge advoca

their responsibilities under new anti-terrorist directi

sure the implementation of these directives servicewi

Beginning in June 1979, the International Law Divis

the "operationalization" of international law, that is, t

of the subject into the form most directly amenable to 

Thus, beyond instruction in the substance of internat

major focus of the Division has become instruction on 

aspects of the successful delivery to command and st

tionallaw services. To tie this orientation to present fi

Division has (1) established close liaison with practic

devised a program for observation and evaluation of re

cises with a view toward their development as a maj

teaching medium, and (3) begun threat research and 

evant to the U.S. law of war program. 

The 9th Contract Attorney's Advanced -Course, 

1979, featured contract formation in government co

phasis was placed on socioeconomic policies and oth

The course included discussions of the Federal Acqui

tion, minority business enterprise programs, labor 

asides, affirmative action programs, and the Contract 

of 1978. 

The Administrative and Civil Law Division sponso

of continuing legal education courses in fiscal year 19

sistance, Government Information Practices, Claims, F

Relations, Military Administrative Law Developme

mental Law, Litigation, and Law Office Managemen

the courses presented. In addition, the Division sent 

to the NCO Advanced Course at Fort Benjamin Harri

courses in administrative and civil law subjects. 
Advocate. 

On 1 May 1979, the third Charles L. Decker Lectur

trative and Civil Law was presented by Professo

Whitebread, Professor of Law at the University of Vir

sor Whitebread's topic was "The Revolution in Juve

Procedure." 

The Honorable Romano L. Mazzoli, Congressman, T

Kentucky, delivered the Eighth Kenneth J. Hodso

Criminal Law on 23 March 1979. 

The Edward H. Young Lecture in Military Legal E

presented by Professor Kenneth R. Redden, Profes

the University of Virginia, on 27 September 1979. 

The Judge Advocate General's School was the site 

Advocate General's Service Organizations Court-Mart

training, 18-29 June 1979, and of the Basic Offic

Course Phase VI (International Law and Contract 

Judge Advocate Reserve Components General Staff C

phase, 9-20 July 1979. Approximately 250 Reserve ju

were trained at these sessions. 

The Reserve Components Technical (On-Site) Trai

for the academic year 1978-1979 provided training to 

judge advocates, 137 enlisted members, and 24 civilia

44 cities covered during 21 trips. The Law School Lia

was revamped during the last quarter of fiscal ye

hundred twenty-four law schools now have liaison of

calendar year 1978, Reserve judge advocates assig

troop program units provided over 88,000 manhours 

port to the active Army. 

The Judge Advocate General's Mobilization Designa

administered by the Reserve Affairs Department of 

expanded to more than 500 positions CONUS-wide. O

ferring from Troop Program Units to the Individual R

are seeking Mobilization Designation vacancies, and 

nent Staff Judge Advocates are relying increasingly o

28 
G. Spies, Mr. James W. Curtis, and Dean Donald 

Dean Chapain D. Clark, the other member of the Bo

to attend. 

Eighteen German jurists and senior prosecutors

Judge Advocate General, were briefed on the opera

and the United States Military Legal System, 16-22 

On 10 August 1979, Colonel David L. Minton su

Barney L. Brannen, Jr., as 13th Commandant ofTJA

ant Colonel Robert M. Nutt, formerly Chief, Con

sion, TJAGSA, succeeded Colonel Minton as Depu

and Director, Academic Department. 

PERSONNEL, PLANS, AND POLIC

Excluding law students, the average strength of 

vocate General's Corps for fiscal year 1979 was 1,43

minority groups were 55 Blacks, 21 Hispanics, 12 A

Americans, and 84 women. The fiscal year 1979 a

compares with an average of 1,440 in fiscal year 197

year 1977, 1,588 in fiscal year 1976, and 1,590 in f

The grade distribution of the Corps at the end of the 

4 general officers, 85 colonels, 143 lieutenant colon

and 964 captains. There were also 56 warrant offic

70 officers were participating in the Funded Legal 

gram. 

To ensure that the best qualified candidates for 

sion, career status, and The Judge Advocate O

Course were selected, formal boards were conve

Judge Advocate General's written instructions a

during the year. 

In February 1979 a selection board was conven

21 active duty commissioned officers to commence l

the Funded Legal Education Program. 
U.S. Army Command and General Staff College..................

Armed Forces Staff College. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

The Judge Advocate Officer Graduate Course.....................

Concurrent with the testing of the U.S. Army Tr

Service, the policy of deferred certification of defense 

scribed in reports of prior years was discontinued. 

ALTON H. HARVEY 

Major General, USA 

The Judge Advocate G

30 
pursuant to 

THE UNIFORM CODE OF MILITARY JUST

for 

FISCAL YEAR 1979 

Supervision of the administration of military 

Complying with the requirement of Article 6(a), Unif

Military Justice, the Judge Advocate General and the D

Advocate General continued to visit commands within 

States and Europe in the supervision of the administra

tary justice. 

Court-martial workload. 

a. There has been an increase in the total numbe

martial during fiscal year 1979. (See Exhibit A attache

port.) 

b. During fiscal year 1979, the U.S. Navy Court of 

view received for review 1,970 new courts-martial case

of 209 general courts-martial and 1,761 special court

compared with 1,746 courts-martial, consisting of 

courts-martial and 1,492 special courts-martial, durin

1978. Of the 1,970 new cases received by the U.S. Na

Military Review in fiscal year 1979, 1,676 accused reque

(85 percent). 

Navy-Marine Corps Trial Judiciary 

a. The Navy-Marine Corps Trial Judiciary (Trial Jud

its inception in SECNAVINST 5813.6 of 9 May 1962. 

fective date of the Military Justice Act of 1968, and pr

1979, the Trial Judiciary supplied all military judges fo

courts-martial tried in the naval service, and suppleme

hoc special courts-martial military judges assigned to 

mands. In November 1973, however, the vast majority 
gy j

the Navy-Marine Corps Trial Judiciary. At the end 

1979 the Trial JUdiciary consisted of 18 general c

judges, the same as at the end of fiscal year 1978. T

the 14 special courts-martial military judges on 1 M

ever, brought the strength of the Navy-Marine 

Judiciary to 34 special courts-martial military judges 

fiscal year 1979, up from 20 at the end of fiscal year 1

c. Some 22 military judges attended the annual Ju

General's Conference held in Washington, D.C. fro

tober 1978. Two military judges attended the regul

trial judges' course at the National Judicial College, R

One military judge attended the Criminal Law Cour

tional Judicial College, Reno, Nevada. Two milita

tended the Criminal Evidence Course at the Nationa

lege, Reno, Nevada. Eleven judges attended the Tr

tary Judges' Seminar at Maxwell Air Force Base, A

military judges attended the East Coast ATLA Se

Camp Lejeune, North Carolina. Thirteen military ju

the West Coast AT LA Seminar held at Camp Pendlet

Five military judges attended a military judges

Okinawa, held from 5-7 April 1979. One military jud

military judges' seminar hosted by the Army Judicia

held at Garmisch, Germany. 

Naval Legal Service. 

a. The Naval Legal Service (NLS) presently consis

NLS offices and detachments which are located in a

concentration throughout the world. The total manp

authorization for the NLS includes 285 judge advoca

officers, l11legalmen, and, for fiscal year 1979, 162 ci

ees (including 33 direct·-hire foreign nationals and 7 

foreign nationals). Navy judge advocates in the NLS 

proximately one-third of the Navy's total judge advoc

32 
ships in Long Beach. Also, approval has been recei

Chief of Naval Operations to establish Detachments 

leans, Louisiana, and Annapolis, Maryland. These new 

will become fully operational on 1 April 1980. In ad

correspondence has been forwarded to commands conc

inputs to proposed Detachments at Meridian, Mississip

Mississippi, and Port Hueneme, California. 

d. A management initiative was considered necessar

of providing adequate legal services to the fleet, includ

command-service/command-liaison program, and a leg

program more responsive to the needs of the operatin

assessment was made of the minimum personnel need

foregoing goal. Expanded command-services/command

tions are predicated upon a fundamental concept tha

judge advocate or member of the command-service divi

the recipient command, familiarize himself with th

legal/disciplinary problems, and assist the command

reaching a timely solution to those problems. This fun

only require additional judge advocates, but will also 

tional paralegal/clerical personnel for support. Thirty

advocates and twenty-five paralegal personnel, plus 

associated office equipment will be required to accomp

ditional responsibilities. The additional requirements 

cluded in the POM submission for fiscal year 1982. Pen

of this POM request, permission has been granted by 

Naval Operations to over-write these billets in the JA

strength for a two year period, to permit immediate im

of these initiatives. 

Article 69, UCMJ, Petitions. a. The number of p

pursuant to Article 69, Uniform Code of Military Ju

which the Judge Advocate General may vacate or mo

ings or sentence of courts-martial which have been fin

under Article 76, but have not been reviewed by th

Court of Military Review, increased during fiscal year 
qg 

tive discharge awarded as part of a sentence by court

cases were pending at the close of the fiscal year. 

Annual Judge Advocate General's Conference. 

a. A conference of judge advocates from all major 

rine Corps commands was held in Washington

October-27 October 1978. The conference heard ad

Under Secretary of the Navy, the Chief of Naval O

the Commandant of the Marine Corps. The confer

formal presentations on various legal topics; e.g., r

justice developments; amendments to the Uniform C

Justice and the Manual for Courts-Martial, (both t

and those still under study by the Joint-Service Com

tary Justice); standards of conduct; and current civ

volving the naval service. In addition to these presen

nars were held which discussed the handling of rape 

offense cases, including their psychiatric, investigat

evidentiary and instructional aspects; the disability e

ess, with a discussion of participants' roles and the p

upon the service member following the disability dec

Russo problems, including the Navy's basic enlistm

requirements; and guidance for judge advocates who 

upon to advise or act as management representatives 

ployment Opportunity administrative hearings. O

were devoted to search-and-seizure problems, inclu

marijuana dogs, and barracks, vehicle, consent, and 

searches; current Department of the Navy federal cou

the area of civilian-personnel law, with emphasis 

judge advocates in supporting such litigation efforts 

covery stage up to trial; theoretical and practical prob

legal ethics; the Federal Labor Relations Program un

Order 11491; management issues in the Naval Lega

corrections center philosophy. Additional seminars ad

of concern and interest to personnel associated w

34 
year. Plans are already underway for a similar confe

year 1980. 

Naval Justice School. 

a. The Naval Justice School, in Newport, Rhode 

teaching staff of twelve officers and six enlisted p

sented the following courses of instruction in milita

lated administrative and civil law matters to a tota

dents during fiscal year 1979. 

(1) Lawyer Course: Four eight-week lawyer clas

sented during the year. This course, designed to 

training in military justice and military administrativ

matters to incoming Navy and Marine Corps lawyer

hours of classroom instruction and 127 hours of pract

including moot courts and various criminal law pract

Training was provided to 82 Navy lawyers and 54 

lawyers. 

(2) Legal Officer Course: Eight five-week classes w

during the year (seven classes in Newport and one at 

ton, California). This course is designed for nonlawy

cers about to assume duties as a legal officer of a s

other military unit with no military lawyer assigned. 

course curriculum are 150 classroom hours and 44 hou

exercises and seminars. Training was provided to 208 

112 Marine Corps officers, and 13 Coast Guard office

(3) Naval-Marine Corps Reserve Officer Basic a

Courses: These two-week courses of instruction ar

each summer for Reserve lawyers of the Navy and 

The Basic Course serves as an introduction to militar

lawyers without significant active duty legal experi

fresher Course is designed for lawyers who have pre

on extended active duty as judge advocates or milita

those who previously have attended the Reserve Bas
North Carolina. This course is designed primarily for 

officers and executive officers, and is intended to prepa

cers to handle the legal problems normally faced by 

and executive officers in the areas of military justice 

trative and civil law. During fiscal year 1979, training 

to 456 Navy officers, 316 Marine Corps officers, 47 

officers, 12 Army officers, two Air Force officers, and t

(5) Legal Clerk Course: Five three-and-one half-w

were conducted during the fiscal year. This course is 

train enlisted personnel to serve as legal yeomen or le

their respective commands. Graduation from this cour

the Court Reporting Course, was provided to 170 Na

and 14 Coast Guard personnel. 

(6) Court Reporting Course: Four five-and-one-half-

were presented during fiscal year 1979. The purpose o

is to train enlistec1. personnel in the field of closed-m

porting. Training was provided to 53 Navy personnel, 

sonnel, and 13 Coast Guard personnel. 

b. In addition to those formal courses of instruction 

the Naval Justice School also presented nearly 250 lec

instruction in the areas of the law of search and seizure

and admissions, nonjudicial punishment, investigations

tive discharges, and command relations with civil au

3,024 students at the Surface Warfare Officers School, 

didate School, Chaplains School, Naval Academy 

School, and the Naval War College, all in Newport, R

and at the Naval Submarine School in New London, C

Article 138, UCMJ, Complaints of Wrongs. In fisc

136 complaints of wrongs were received in the Office 

Advocate General. Two such complaints were pendin

year 1978. One hundred thirty-six complaints of wron

the two pending from fiscal year 1978, were reviewed 

year 1979, leaving two pending review as of 30 Septem

36 
Justice and the Manual for CourtsMartial. It also 

forum for the exchange of ideas relating to military jus

among the services. In the past, the Committee has m

ered proposals and ideas generated within the military 

1976, it was given the additional responsibility for com

military justice concerns originating from outside the m

ices. 

b. The proposed legislation on improving the effic

military justice system, noted in last year's report, w

by the Department of Defense as part of its legislative 

the first session of the 96th Congress. 

The Working Group of the Joint-Service Committee 

thorough review of the military rules of evidence con

Manual for Courts-Martial in light of the experience of 

courts with the new Federal Rules of Evidence. As a r

review, a proposed new evidence code for the military w

by the Joint-Service Committee. It is to be entitled T

Rules of Evidence and will be submitted in the form o

ment to the Manual for Courts-Martial, as a propose

Order, via the Office of Management and Budget, to th

for signature. The proposed Military Rules of Evidenc

come effective on 1 September 1980. 

Ethics. Action was taken to maintain high ethical s

counsel and judges who participate in courts-martia

judge advocates received instruction at the Naval Justi

the ABA Code of Professional Responsibility and Canon

Ethics, and the ABA Standards for the Administration 

Justice. The JAG Ethics Committee was established 

0141, Manual of the Judge Advocate General, to con

questions and make appropriate recommendations to th

vocate General. It is comprised of the Assistant Judg

General (Civil Law); the Assistant Judge Advocate G

tary Law); the Assistant Judge Advocate General (Mili

nel and Management); a representative of the Comma
38 
REVIEWED DURING LAST REPORTING PERIOD 

PART 5 - APPELLATE COUNSEL REQUESTS BEFORE U S NAVY COUR

REVIEW 

6 NUMBER I 1678 5% I.!::.!·::.:::.!::.!::.:::.!.:.•.!::.!.:.•.!::.:::.!::.!::.:::'.:::.:::.!.:...!::.!:::.:::.!::.!::.!::..!::'.•::.!.::.:.:' t.::::)){ ,.,.,.. ':'\ :::::: ::f }!i

PE ACE NTAGE. _ ...........:.:...:.:.:.:.;.::?~:~::.:.:.:.:.;.:.:.:.:-:.:.:.:.;.:.;.:.

PART 6 - U. S. COURT OF MILITARY APPEALS ACTIONS 

PERCENTAGE Of COMR REVIEWED CASES FORWARDED TO USCMA 

PERCENTAGE OF INCREASE (+,/OECREASE (-) OVER PREVIOUS REPORTING PERIOD 

PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL PETITIONS GRANTED 

PEACENTAGE OF INCREASE (+)/OECREASE (-) OVER PREVIOUS REPORTING PERIOD 

PERCENTAGE OF PETITIONS GRANTED OF TOTAL CASES REVIEWED BY COMR 

RATE OF INCREASE C+'/OECREASE (-lOVER THE NUMBER OF CASES REVIEWED DURING 

LAST REPORTING PERIOD 

PAGEJOF2 
PART 9· COMPLAINTS UNDER ARTICLE 138 

NUMBER OF COMPLAINTS \ 136 

PART 10· STRENGTH 

!,,}::::.:::.:...:...... . AVERAGE ACTIVE DUTY STRENGTH 711647 

PAGE20F2 

40 
In compliance with the requirements of Article 6

Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Maj General Walter 

Brig General James Taylor, Jr., made official staff v

offices in the United States and overseas. They also 

participated in various bar association meetings, an

numerous civil, professional, and military organization

MILITARY JUSTICE STATISTICS AND 


US AIR FORCE JUDICIARY ACTIVITIES 


During FY 1979, the Judiciary Directorate of the 

Judge Advocate General processed in excess of 1,72

volving military justice. The Directorate has the ove

bility of supervising the administration of military jus

out the United States Air Force from the trial level 

appellate review process, pursuant to the provisions o

for Courts-Martial 1969 (Rev.) and the UCMJ. In add

rectorate had the staff responsibility for the Office o

Advocate General in all Air Force military justice m

arise in connection with programs, special projects, st

quiries generated by the Air Staff; Headquarters USA

taries, Departments of Defense, Army, Navy, and Air 

bers of Congress; and other interested federal, state an

cies. Some of the Directorate's activities are discussed 

a. The Judiciary Directorate also serves as the actio

the review of applications submitted to the Board for 

Military Records. There were 239 formal opinions pro

Secretary of the Air Force concerning those applicatio

b. The Directorate also received 737 inquiries in spec

quiring either formal written replies or telephonic rep

executive officials, including the President, or to mem

gress. 
from different offices and agencies both within and o

These special requests were received from such acti

General Accounting Office, the Senate Armed Services 

Air Force Security Police and Security Service, and th

Military Personnel Center. 

Due to difficulties encountered at AFDSDC, the c

AMJAMS to the H-6000 computer was revised t

worldwide implementation date for 1 January 1981. T

ties related to programming errors discovered during 

testing phase of the conversion schedule which requir

rewriting of various system programs. Due to th

AFDSDC to deliver the conversion for 1 January 1980

conversion effort was elevated to a Category III prio

the design center. A complete functional description wa

the project and it was agreed to add several addition

the standard products as part of the conversion effort

added attention now being given to the AMJAMS 

AFDSDC and to the existence of a complete functiona

for the system, there should be no question about impl

conversion on 1 January 1981, as now scheduled. 

Trial Judiciary 

The Air Force Trial Judiciary had an average of 28 

judges assigned at eleven locations. After a closure of 

was determined to be necessary to reopen the RAF 

England, District office due to the caseload at the base

Serving as legal advisor on officer elimination administr

was given equal priority with serving as military judg

martial as a duty for trial judiciary personnel. A limi

providing for joint use of military trial judges in Alaska 

Air Force and Army was begun in January 1979 to red

sending personnel there for both services. 

42 
RATE OF INCREASE (+'/DECREASE (-, OVER NUMBER OF CASES 

REVIEWED DURING LAST REPORTING PERIOD 

PART 5· APPELLATE COUNSEL REQUESTS BEFORE COURT 

REVIEW 

PART 6· U. S. COURT OF MILITARY APPEALS ACTIONS 

PERCENTAGE OF COMR REVIEWED CASES FORWARDED TO useMA 144/207 

PERCENTAGE OF INCREASE (+)/OECREASE {-, OVER PREVIOUS REPORTING 'EPUOO 

PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL PETITIONS GRANTED 14/144 

PERCENTAGE OF INCREASE (+)/DECREASE {-} OVER PREVIOUS REPORTING PERIOD 

PERCENTAGE OF PETITIONS GRANTEO OF TOTAL CASES REVIEWED BY COMR 14/207 

RATE OF INCREASE (+)/OECREASE C-' OVER THE NUMBER OF CASES REVIEWED DURING 

LAST REPORTING PERIOD FY 78: 56· FY 79: 31 

PAGE 1 OF 2 
PART 9· COMPLAINTS UNDER ARTICLE 138 

NUMBER OF COMPLAINTS I 43 

PART10·STRENGTH 

AVERAGE ACTIVE DUTY STRENGTH 

PAGE2QF2 

44 
gram the Government is now equally well served. A 

number of favorable communications indicate that thi

CTC program has been very well received by commande

judge advocates and has filled a need for an active prog

hance the quality of advocacy in courts-martial. 

The 22 CTC located around the world at 9 locations w

designated judicial circuits tried 94% of the general cou

and 28% of the special courts-martial in addition to ac

government representative in 21% of the pretrial inv

during FY 79. The circuit trial counsel, specifically s

their position, are also available to base legal offices for 

tive board proceedings, advice and consultation on vario

justice matters and the training of less experienced loca

vocates. The CTC have set the example to be followed 

sional trial advocacy in the Air Force. The training of 

advocates as competent trial counsel, either as future de

. sel or prosecutors, is one of the significant features of th

CTC program. 

Judge advocates are no longer automatically certified 

cle 27, UCMJ by The Judge Advocate General as compe

form duties as trial and defense counsel before gene

martial upon graduation from the basic judge advocate co

AF JAG School at Maxwell AFB, AL. This change ma

ruary 1978, now requires demonstrated competency as a 

cate in actual court-martial cases as attested by military 

. fellow counsel prior to the recommendation by the nom

judge advocate for certification. 

Confinement Facilities 

The changes in disposition of convicted service m

placed in effect in 1978, remain in effect. Depending upo

ousness of the offense, the length of sentence, and the p

the individual for valuable further service if restored to 
pq

New rules governing privileges, search and seizure

admissions, and identification procedures were also 

PREVENTIVE LAW AND LEGAL ASSISTANCE 

The Preventive Law Program goal of problem av

education is being achieved. By various means of co

Force personnel learn of their legal obligations as 

tential personal legal problems. This education pro

in our people seeking the advice of an attorney pr

~hange in their legal status. Indicative of how well 

worked is reflected in the legal assistance statistic

porting period. In excess of 1,000,000 services w

383,000 clients representing an increase of 11% o

porting period. The positive aspects of these progr

rale and discipline with the end result being impr

ment of the Air Force mission. 

EDUCATION AND TRAINING 

During calendar year 1979, The Judge Advoca

partment provided continuing legal and general op

personnel. 

The Air Force Judge Advocate General's School, 

Maxwell AFB, Alabama taught the following reside

a. The Judge A<!vocate Staff Officer Course-T

course provides the basic educational tools for an 

the Air Force, to practice military law. The cours

four times during 1979, and 180 judge advocates co

b. The Staff Judge Advocate Course-This cours

once during 1979, and 42 judge advocates attended 

46 
Legal Services Refresher Courses were conducted and 

students. 

Professional Military Training 

During 1979, five judge advocates attended the Air C

Staff College, and two attended the Air War College 

AFB, Alabama. Two officers attended the Armed Forc

lege, and one attended the National War College. 

Short Courses at Civilian Universities 

a. Prosecuting Attorney's Course at No

University-25 judge advocates attended this five-d

1979. 

b. Defense Attorney's Course at Northwestern Un

judge advocates attended this five-day course in 1979. 

c. National College of State Trial Judges at the U

Nevada. Sixteen judge advocates and one senior NC

Court Administrator, attended courses at the National 

Masters In Law Program 

During 1979 two judge advocates received their Mas

Labor Law; seven in Government Procurement Law; t

national Law; and one in Environmental Law. 

Procurement Law Courses: U.S. Army JAG School 

Eighty judge advocates attended the basic procu

course, and ten judge advocates attended the advan

ment law course. 

CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION SEMINARS USING V

These seminar programs, specifically developed for 

vide a current course of study on subjects of special in
Supreme Court Trends in Criminal Law 

Appellate Commentary 

Environmental Law 

Government Contract Law 

Computer Assisted Legal Research 

Estate Planning 

THE REPORTER, AFRP 110-2 

Interest in the Reporter has continued to expand. 

scription program forecast in last year's report is now 

tion managed by the Government Printing Office. 

clude government agencies at federal, state and local 

and public libraries, bar associations, and law firms. 

exposure has had a naturally positive effect on the p

the Air Force judge advocate. Topics with special em

included the duties and responsibilities of this Depa

personnel and law office management. The Reporter 

lauded by its readership as an extremely valuable 

media, promoting crossfeed, sharing streamlined p

lessons learned, and promoting a better informed JA

prepared to support commanders at all levels. There 

a more necessary and effective recurring pUblicatio

the Department of Defense. 

FEDERAL LEGAL INFORMATION THROUGH ELECTRO

The Office of The Judge Advocate General, USAF

operate and expand one of the world's largest autom

search systems. Department of Defense users in 197

Joint Chiefs of Staff, every uniformed service, the C

Appeals and the Armed Services Board of Contrac

numerous non-DOD users included the Office of the P

48 
Major General, 

The Judge Advoc

United States Ai
,

The table below shows the number of court-martial r

and filed at Coast Guard Headquarters during FY-

preceding years. 

79 78 77 76A 

General Courts-Martial .............. 2 3 5 0 

Special Courts-Martial ............... 47 58 84 25 

Summary Courts-Martial ............. 122 180 188 47 

171 241 277 72 

COURTS-MARTIAL 

As has been the case in the past, counsel and milita

again detailed to all special courts-martial. For m

presiding judge was the full-time general courts-

When he was unavailable, military judges with other 

were utilized. Control of the detail of judges is cent

and all requirements have been filled in a timely fash

General Courts-Marial 

Neither of the accused tried by the two general 

convened in the Coast Guard this fiscal year requeste

tary judge alone. One court, which included enli

found the accused guilty of 12 specifications allegin

Article 121 (larceny and wrongful appropriation) and 

accused to pay a fine of $500. The other Court fou

guilty of one specification each under Article 128 (as

cle 134 (assault with intent to commit murder) and 

accused to confinement, reduction in rate, and forfe

$2,400. Neither sentence required review under Arti

50 
Pay Grade 

E-1 through E-3 (Non-Rated) ...................................

E-4 through E-6 (Petty Officers) ................................

E-7 through E-9 (Chief Petty Officers) ..........................

Commissioned Officers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

The following table shows the distribution of the 2

tions referred to the 47 special courts-martial. 

Violation of the UCMJ, Article 

85 and 86 (desertion and UA) ...................................

87 (missing movement) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

91 (willful disobedience or disrespect) ...........................

92 (violation of order or regulation) .............................

108 (offenses against USCG property) ...........................

121 (larceny and wrongful appropriation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

123 (forgery) ...................................................

128 (assault) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

134 (breaking restriction) .......................................

134 or 92 (marijuana offenses) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

134 or 92 (other controlled drug offenses) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Other offenses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

The following is a breakdown of sentences awarded 

tary judge alone in special courts-martial (13 conviction

Sentence 

bad-conduct discharge ..........................................

confinement at hard labor (1 maximum). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

reduction in rate ................................................

restriction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

forfeiture of pay ($6,792 total) ..................................

others..........................................................
forfeiture of pay ($18,304 total) .............................

fine ($1,950) ., . . .... . ... ... . . ... ... . . ... . . ... . . .... . ... . . ... 

others......................................................

In eight of these 29 convictions, the accused plea

charges and specifications. 

The following indicates the three sentences impos

cial courts-martial in the past three fiscal years. 

NUMBER OF 

FY CONVICTIONS FORFEITURES CONFINEME

79 42 30 (71%) 24 (57%

78 52 28 (54%) 25 (48%

77 76 53 (70%) 44 (58%

Average % for 3 yrs: (65%) (54%

CONTINUING TRENDS 

While enlisted active duty strength in the Coas

mained about the same during the past three years

courts-martial continue to decline. This continuin

linked to the continuing increases in imposition

punishment and administrative discharge of individu

performance, unsuitability, misconduct! and abuse 

cohol. The following illustrates these decreases and 

past two years. 

COURTS-MARTIAL NJP 

FY NO. (% OF DECREASE) NO. (% OF INCREASE) 

77 277 2,430 

78 241 (-13%) 2,615 (+08%) 

79 171 (-290/0) 3,086 (+18%) 

52 
PERSONNEL AND TRAINING 

The Coast Guard has 148 law specialists serving on 

123 are serving in a legal capacity and 25 are serving in 

billets. The junior law specialists serving at district of

trial and defense counsel services. Senior law spec

serving as district legal officers, are used as military 

required. 

The Fourth Coast Guard Basic Law Specialist Cours

the Coast Guard Reserve Training Center, Yorktow

from 27 August 1979 through 19 October 1979. Th

course introduced both the direct commissioned law

regular officers just completing law school to the man

would soon perform as Coast Guard law specialists. O

course was devoted to military justice. Nonjudicial 

jurisdiction, professional responsibility and ethics, 

dures, trial/defense counsel duties, and the Articles 

most frequently litigated were some of the areas cover

dent was given an opportunity to demonstrate rece

knowledge and skills in moot courts. 

ADDITIONAL MILITARY JUSTICE STATISTIC

Appendix A contains additional basic military justice 

the reporting period and reflects the increase/dec

workload in various categories. 

LINDA HELLER KAMM 

General Counsel 

Department of Transpo

Appendix A: U.S. Coast Guard Courts-Martial/NJP Statist

October 1, 1978 to September 30, 1979 (FY-1
RATE OF INCREASE t+)/DECREASE (-lOVER NUMBER OF CASES 

REVI£:WED DURING LAST REPORTING PERIOD 

PART 5 - APPELLATE COUNSEL REQUESTS BEFORE COAST GUARD CO

REVIEW 

PERCENTAGE OF COMA REVIEWED CASES FORWARDED TO USCMA 

PERCENTAC1E OF INCREASE (+I/DECREASE (-) OVER PREVIOUS REPORTING PERIOD 

PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL PETITIONS GRANTED 

PERCENTAGE OF INCREASE (+)/DECREASE (-) OVER PREVIOUS REPOATING PERIOD 

PERCENTAGE OF PETITIONS GRANTED OF TOTAL CASES REVIEWED BY COMR 

RATE OF INCREASE I+'/DECREASE 1-) OVER THE NUMBER OF CASES REVIEWED DURING 

LAST REPORTING PERIOD 

PAGEIOF2 

54 
PART 9 - COMPLAINTS UNDER ARTICLE 138 

NUMBER OF COMPLAINTS I 2 

PART10-STRENGTH 

AVERAGE ACTIVE DUTY STRENGTH 

PAGE 20F 2 


*Part 10 - Average active duty strength is that of enlist

'lrU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 19800-322-580