Court Opinion

ID: 9836431
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-02 03:13:50.74874+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:45:17.516140
License: Public Domain

EFFRON, Judge
(concurring in the result):
Appellant was represented in this case by both civilian and military defense counsel. Appellant’s counsel did not object to trial counsel’s closing argument. Absent such an objection, in a case that does not involve an allegation of ineffective assistance of counsel, the burden is on Appellant to demonstrate plain error under United States v. Powell, 49 M.J. 460 (C.A.A.F.1998). Under Powell, Appellant must demonstrate that: (1) there was an error; (2) the error was plain or obvious; and (3) the error materially prejudiced a substantial right. Id. at 463-65. Both the lead opinion and the dissenting opinion set forth reasonable interpretations of trial counsel’s closing argument. In that context, Appellant has not met his burden of demonstrating under the second prong of Powell that any error was so obvious that the military judge should have intervened in the absence of objection by defense counsel.