Court Opinion

ID: 9869382
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-26 19:27:32.792592+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:46:01.431686
License: Public Domain

Senior Judge MULLIGAN,
concurring:
I concur in the result but write separately as to my colleagues’ treatment of our superi- or court’s decision in United States v. Hills, 75 M.J. 350 (C.A.A.F. 2016).. I read Hills narrowly to preclude “the use of [Mil. R. Evid.] 413 or Fed. R. Evid. 413 as a mechanism for admitting evidence of charged conduct to, which an accused has pleaded not guilty in order to show propensity to commit the very same charged conduct.” Id. at 354 (emphasis added). The criminal conduct which led to charges in Hills involved the same victim; on the same night; in the same room. Hills should not be read sweepingly to preclude evidence of other offenses, charged or uncharged, on different victims, at different times and locations.