Professional Documents
Culture Documents
United States v. Elfayoumi, C.A.A.F. (2008)
United States v. Elfayoumi, C.A.A.F. (2008)
United States v. Elfayoumi, C.A.A.F. (2008)
v.
Ahmed M. ELFAYOUMI, Sergeant
U.S. Army, Appellant
No. 07-0346
Crim. App. No. 20010415
United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces
Argued February 26, 2008
Decided June 4, 2008
BAKER, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which EFFRON,
C.J., and STUCKY, J., joined. ERDMANN, J., filed a separate
dissenting opinion in which RYAN, J., joined.
Counsel
For Appellant: Frank J. Spinner, Esq. (argued); Major Teresa L.
Raymond (on brief); Major Sean F. Mangan and Captain Tyeshe
Elizabeth Lowery.
For Appellee: Captain Michael G. Pond (argued); Major Elizabeth
G. Marotta and Captain Michael C. Friess (on brief); Captain
Andrew C. Baum.
Military Judge:
James L. Pohl
The
We conclude the
In addition,
MJ:
MEM:
MJ:
MEM:
Yes, sir.
MJ:
MEM:
Yes, sir.
III
MEM:
Yes, sir.
MJ:
MEM:
Yes, sir.
MJ:
MEM:
MJ:
MEM:
Yes, sir.
MJ:
MEM:
No, sir.
MJ:
MEM:
Yes, sir.
[Mem:]
[MEM:]
No.
[DC:]
{MEM:]
[DC:]
Yes, sir.
[MEM:]
According to
With
This rule
Implied
bias exists when most people in the same position as the court
member would be prejudiced.
like the military criminal code, are set in law by the political
branches - the Congress and the Executive.
The duty of judges is to uphold the law in constitutional
context.
To accomplish this
Faced
The military
Further, defense
So too, a member
might have a strongly held view about unlawful conduct -murder, shoplifting, forcible sodomy, etc.
if not all members, would.
The law
10
United States v.
As I
so strong that they will not yield and permit a potential member
to adjudicate the case without violating those principles, there
is cause to excuse that member.
456 F.3d 996, 1017 (9th Cir. 2006); United States v. Geffrard,
87 F.3d 448, 451-52 (11th Cir. 1996); United States v. Hoffman,
806 F.2d 703, 705 (7th Cir. 1986).
He stated without
a disclaimer.
In addition, the
This is the
type of case in which the military judge should have applied the
liberal grant mandate and utilized the added flexibility, and
duty, to err on the side of caution where there is substantial
doubt as to the fairness of having [MAJ G] sit.
v. Elfayoumi, __ M.J. __ (8-9) (C.A.A.F. 2008).
dissent.
United States
I therefore