About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

1985 Army Law. 1 (1985)

handle is hein.journals/armylaw1985 and id is 1 raw text is: THE ARMY LAWYER Headquarters, Department of the Army Department of the Army Pamphlet 27-50-145 January 1985 Table of Contents Uncharged Misconduct 1 TJAG Policy Letter 84-5-Legal Assis- tance Representation of Both Spouses 2 Drunk Driving: The Army's Mandatory Administrative Sanctions 19 The Competition in Contracting Act of 1984 31 CAS: More Than Just Another Acronym 43 The Advocacy Section 45 Trial Counsel Forum 46 The Advocate 59 Judiciary Notes 73 LAMP Committee Report 75 Legal Assistance Items 76 Guard and Reserve Affairs Items 81 Enlisted Update 84 .CLE News 85 Current Material of Interest Uncharged Misconduct Colonel Francis A. Gilligan Deputy Commandant, TJA GSA Relevance problems are presented by evi- dence of uncharged misconduct, which both the trial and defense counsel may seek to intro- duce. When a party seeks to introduce such evi- dence to establish the crime charged, its proba- tive value must outweigh the probability that the fact finder will attach undue weight to the evidence. Other factors militating against the admissibility of such evidence are waste of time, unfair surprise, and distraction from the main issue.' Both the prosecutor and the defense counsel must be very circumspect about the introduc- tion of uncharged misconduct. The prosecution should insure that the introduction of the evi- dence is not merely a ruse to show the defen- dant is a bad person; the evidence must be both logically and legally relevant to be admissible. The introduction of this type of evidence has been called the Prosecutor's Delight.2 The evidence may be so deadly that it results in con- viction of an innocent individual.3 The defense 'Michelson v. United States, 335 U.S. 469 (1948); Manual for Courts-Martial, United States, 1984, Mil. R. Evid. 403 [here- inafter cited as Mil. R. Evid.j. Surprise is not mentioned in Rule 403 as a factor since the remedy for surprise is not in- admissibility of the evidence but a continuance. 2Comment, Evidence of Prior Acquittals: An Attack on the Prosecutor's Delight, 21 U.C.L.A. L. Rev. 892,896(1974). 3See E. Imwinkelried, Uncharged Misconduct Evidence § 1:03 (1984) [hereinafter cited as Imwinkelried]. 1~~N

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most