[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 23 (Wednesday, February 4, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6057-6060]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-02149]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Office of the Secretary
[Docket ID: DoD-2014-OS-0140]
Manual for Courts-Martial; Proposed Amendments
AGENCY: Joint Service Committee on Military Justice (JSC), Department
of Defense.
ACTION: Notice of response to public comments on proposed amendments to
the Manual for Courts-Martial, United States (2012 ed.).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Joint Service Committee on Military Justice (JSC) is
publishing final proposed amendments to the Manual for Courts-Martial,
United States (MCM). The proposed changes concern the rules of evidence
and the punitive articles applicable in trials by courts-martial. These
proposed changes have not been coordinated within the Department of
Defense under DoD Directive 5500.1, ``Preparation, Processing and
Coordinating Legislation, Executive Orders, Proclamations, Views
Letters and Testimony,'' June 15, 2007, and do not constitute the
official position of the Department of Defense, the Military
Departments, or any other Government agency.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Capt Harlye S. Carlton, USMC, (703)
963-9299 or [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On October 3, 2014 (79 FR 59938-59959), the JSC published a Notice
of Proposed Amendments concerning the rules of procedure and evidence
and the punitive articles applicable in trials by courts-martial and a
Notice of Public Meeting to receive comments on these proposals. The
public meeting was held on October 29, 2014. Two members of the public
provided oral comments at the public meeting, with one of the members
of the public also submitting a written comment. Additionally, several
written comments were received electronically. All comments were
considered by the JSC.
Public Comments: Comments and materials received from the public
are available under Docket ID Number DoD-2014-OS-0140-0001, Federal
Register Number 2014-23546, and at the following link http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=DOD-2014-OS-0140-0001.
Discussion of Comments and Changes
The JSC considered each public comment and made some modifications
to the proposed amendments accordingly. Additionally, the JSC added
proposed amendments to implement provisions in the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015, Public Law 113-291, December
19, 2014 (FY15 NDAA). Comments that were submitted that are outside the
scope of these proposed changes will be considered as part of the JSC's
2015 annual review of the MCM. The JSC will forward the public comments
and proposed amendments to the Department of Defense. The public
comments regarding the proposed changes and a summary of proposed
amendments to implement FY15 NDAA provisions follow:
a. Several comments recommended adding a requirement to RCM 305(i)
that a neutral and detached officer should inquire whether a victim has
been contacted and provided the opportunity to be heard during the 7-
day review of pretrial confinement. Comments also recommended that a
neutral and detached officer should inquire whether the victim has
waived the right to be heard. The JSC has adopted this proposal in part
as follows:
--R.C.M. 305(i)(2)(D) is amended to read as follows:
``Memorandum. The 7-day reviewing officer's conclusions,
including the factual findings on which they are based, shall be set
forth in a written memorandum. The memorandum shall also state
whether the victim was notified of the review, was given the
opportunity to confer with the representative of the command or
counsel for the government, and was given a reasonable opportunity
to be heard. A copy of the memorandum and all documents considered
by the 7-day reviewing officer shall be maintained in accordance
with regulations prescribed by the Secretary concerned and provided
to the accused or the Government on request.''
b. Two comments recommended amending RCM 702 to clarify that the
[[Page 6058]]
right of a victim not to testify at the Article 32 preliminary hearing
may not be circumvented by ordering a pretrial deposition. The JSC has
adopted this proposal in part and proposed additional amendments to RCM
702 to implement Section 532 of the FY15 NDAA as follows:
--R.C.M. 702(a) is amended to read as follows:
``(a) In general. A deposition may be ordered whenever, after
preferral of charges, due to exceptional circumstances of the case
it is in the interest of justice that the testimony of a prospective
witness be taken and preserved for use at a preliminary hearing
under Article 32 or a court-martial. A victim's declination to
testify at a preliminary hearing or a victim's declination to submit
to pretrial interviews shall not, by themselves, be considered
exceptional circumstances. In accordance with subsection (b) of this
rule below, the convening authority or military judge may order a
deposition of a victim only if it is determined, by a preponderance
of the evidence, that the victim will not be available to testify at
court-martial.''
--R.C.M. 702(c)(2) is amended to read as follows:
``(2) Contents of request. A request for a deposition shall
include:
(A) The name and address of the person whose deposition is
requested, or, if the name of the person is unknown, a description
of the office or position of the person;
(B) A statement of the matters on which the person is to be
examined; and
(C) Whether an oral or written deposition is requested.''
--R.C.M. 702(c)(3)(A) is amended to read as follows:
``(A) Upon receipt of a request for a deposition, the convening
authority or military judge shall determine whether the requesting
party has shown, by a preponderance of the evidence, that due to
exceptional circumstances and in the interest of justice, the
testimony of the prospective witness must be taken and preserved for
use at a preliminary hearing under Article 32 or court-martial.''
--R.C.M. 702(d)(1) is amended to read as follows:
``(1) Detail of deposition officer. When a request for a
deposition is approved, the convening authority shall detail a judge
advocate certified under Art. 27(b) to serve as deposition officer.
When the appointment of a judge advocate as deposition officer is
not practicable, the convening authority may detail an impartial
commissioned officer or appropriate civil officer authorized to
administer oaths, not the accuser, to serve as deposition officer.
If the deposition officer is not a judge advocate, an impartial
judge advocate certified under Art. 27(b) shall be made available to
provide legal advice to the deposition officer.''
c. Several comments recommended changes to the new proposed RCM
1001A, indicating that victims should have the right to testify under
oath or allocute in an unsworn statement. The JSC adopted these
proposals in part as follows:
--A new rule, R.C.M. 1001A, is inserted to read as follows:
``Rule 1001A. Crime victims and presentencing
(a) In general. A crime victim of an offense of which the
accused has been found guilty has the right to be reasonably heard
at a sentencing hearing relating to that offense. A victim under
this rule is not considered a witness for purposes of Article 42(b).
Trial counsel shall ensure the victim is aware of the opportunity to
exercise that right. If the victim exercises the right to be
reasonably heard, the victim shall be called by the court. This
right is independent of whether the victim testified during findings
or is called to testify under R.C.M. 1001.
(b) Definitions.
(1) Crime victim. For purposes of this rule, a ``crime victim''
is an individual who has suffered direct physical, emotional, or
pecuniary harm as a result of the commission of an offense of which
the accused was found guilty.
(2) Victim Impact. For the purposes of this rule ``victim
impact'' includes any financial, social, psychological, or medical
impact on the victim directly relating to or arising from the
offense of which the accused has been found guilty.
(3) Mitigation. For the purposes of this rule ``mitigation''
includes a matter to lessen the punishment to be adjudged by the
court-martial or to furnish grounds for a recommendation of
clemency.
(4) Right to be reasonably heard.
(A) Capital cases. In capital cases, for purposes of this rule
the ``right to be reasonably heard'' means the right to make a sworn
statement.
(B) Non-capital cases. In non-capital cases, for purposes of
this rule the ``right to be reasonably heard'' means the right to
make a sworn or unsworn statement.
(c) Content of statement. The content of statements made under
subsections (d) and (e) of this rule may include victim impact or
matters in mitigation.
(d) Sworn statement. The victim may give a sworn statement under
this rule and shall be subject to cross-examination concerning it by
the trial counsel or defense counsel or examination on it by the
court-martial, or all or any of the three. When a victim is under 18
years of age, incompetent, incapacitated, or deceased, the sworn
statement may be made by the victim's designee appointed under
R.C.M. 801(a)(6). Additionally, a victim under 18 years of age may
elect to make a sworn statement.
(e) Unsworn statement. The victim may make an unsworn statement
and may not be cross-examined by the trial counsel or defense
counsel upon it or examined upon it by the court-martial. The
prosecution or defense may, however, rebut any statements of facts
therein. The unsworn statement may be oral, written, or both. When a
victim is under 18 years of age, incompetent, incapacitated, or
deceased, the unsworn statement may be made by the victim's designee
appointed under R.C.M. 801(a)(6). Additionally, a victim under 18
years of age may elect to make an unsworn statement.
(1) Procedure for presenting unsworn statement. After the
announcement of findings, a victim who would like to present an
unsworn statement shall provide a copy to the trial counsel, defense
counsel, and military judge. The military judge may waive this
requirement for good cause shown.
(2) Upon good cause shown, the military judge may permit the
victim's counsel to deliver all or part of the victim's unsworn
statement.
d. The JSC has proposed an amendment to MRE 404(2)(A) to implement
Section 536 of the FY15 NDAA as follows:
--Mil. R. Evid. 404(a)(2)(A) is amended to read as follows:
``(A) The accused may offer evidence of the accused's pertinent
trait, and if the evidence is admitted, the prosecution may offer
evidence to rebut it. General military character is not a pertinent
trait for the purposes of showing the probability of innocence of
the accused for the following offenses under the UCMJ:
(i) Articles 120-123a;
(ii) Articles 125-127;
(iii) Articles 129-132;
(iv) Any other offense in which evidence of general military
character of the accused is not relevant to any element of an
offense for which the accused has been charged; or
(v) An attempt or conspiracy to commit one of the above
offenses.''
e. Several comments recommended changes to MREs 412, 513, and 514.
Several comments recommended modifying MRE 513(e)(2) to allow for a
patient's counsel to motion the military judge for a closed hearing.
Several comments recommended deleting language stating that the
opportunity to attend and be heard at MRE 513 hearings is ``at the
patient's own expense.'' The JSC has adopted these proposals in part
and proposed additional amendments to MREs 412, 513, and 514 to
implement Sections 534 and 537 of the FY15 NDAA as follows:
--Mil. R. Evid. 412(c)(2) is amended to read as follows:
``(2) Before admitting evidence under this rule, the military
judge must conduct a hearing, which shall be closed. At this
hearing, the parties may call witnesses, including the alleged
victim, and offer relevant evidence. The alleged victim must be
afforded a reasonable opportunity to attend and be heard. However,
the hearing may not be unduly delayed for this purpose. The right to
be heard under this rule includes the right to be heard through
counsel, including victims' counsel under section 1044e of title 10,
United States Code. In a case before a court-martial comprised of a
military judge and members, the military judge shall conduct the
hearing outside the presence of the members pursuant to Article
[[Page 6059]]
39(a). The motion, related papers, and the record of the hearing
must be sealed in accordance with R.C.M. 1103A and remain under seal
unless the military judge or an appellate court orders otherwise.''
--Mil. R. Evid. 513(b)(2) is amended to read as follows:
``(2) ``Psychotherapist'' means a psychiatrist, clinical
psychologist, clinical social worker, or other mental health
professional who is licensed in any State, territory, possession,
the District of Columbia or Puerto Rico to perform professional
services as such, or who holds credentials to provide such services
as such, or who holds credentials to provide such services from any
military health care facility, or is a person reasonably believed by
the patient to have such license or credentials.''
--Mil. R. Evid. 513(d)(8) is deleted.
--Mil. R. Evid. 513(e)(2) is amended to read as follows:
``(2) Before ordering the production or admission of evidence of
a patient's records or communication, the military judge must
conduct a hearing, which shall be closed. At the hearing, the
parties may call witnesses, including the patient, and offer other
relevant evidence. The patient must be afforded a reasonable
opportunity to attend the hearing and be heard. However, the hearing
may not be unduly delayed for this purpose. The right to be heard
under this rule includes the right to be heard through counsel,
including victims' counsel under section 1044e of title 10, United
States Code. In a case before a court-martial comprised of a
military judge and members, the military judge must conduct the
hearing outside the presence of the members.''
--Mil. R. Evid. 513(e)(3) is amended to read as follows:
``(3) The military judge may examine the evidence or a proffer
thereof in camera, if such examination is necessary to rule on the
production or admissibility of protected records or communications.
Prior to conducting an in camera review, the military judge must
find by a preponderance of the evidence that the moving party:
(A) showed a specific factual basis demonstrating a reasonable
likelihood that the records or communications would yield evidence
admissible under an exception to the privilege;
(B) that the requested information meets one of the enumerated
exceptions under subsection (d) of this rule;
(C) that the information sought is not merely cumulative of
other information available; and
(D) that the party made reasonable efforts to obtain the same or
substantially similar information through non-privileged sources.''
--Mil. R. Evid. 513(e)(4) is inserted following Mil. R. Evid.
513(e)(3) to read as follows:
``(4) Any production or disclosure permitted by the military
judge under this rule must be narrowly tailored to only the specific
records or communications, or portions of such records or
communications, that meet the requirements for one of the enumerated
exceptions to the privilege under subsection (d) above and are
included in the stated purpose for which the records or
communications are sought under subsection (e)(1)(A) above.''
--Mil. R. Evid. 513(e)(4) is renumbered as Mil. R. Evid. 513(e)(5).
--Mil. R. Evid. 513(e)(5) is renumbered as Mil. R. Evid. 513(e)(6).
--The title of Mil. R. Evid. 514 is amended to read as follows:
``Victim advocate-victim and Department of Defense Safe Helpline
staff-victim privilege.''
--Mil. R. Evid. 514(a) is amended to read as follows:
``(a) General Rule. A victim has a privilege to refuse to
disclose and to prevent any other person from disclosing a
confidential communication made between the alleged victim and a
victim advocate or between the alleged victim and Department of
Defense Safe Helpline staff, in a case arising under the UCMJ, if
such communication was made for the purpose of facilitating advice
or assistance to the alleged victim.''
--Mil. R. Evid. 514(b)(3)-(5) is amended to read as follows
``(3) ``Department of Defense Safe Helpline staff'' is a person
who is designated by competent authority in writing as Department of
Defense Safe Helpline staff.
(4) A communication is ``confidential'' if made in the course of
the victim advocate-victim relationship or Department of Defense
Safe Helpline staff-victim relationship and not intended to be
disclosed to third persons other than those to whom disclosure is
made in furtherance of the rendition of advice or assistance to the
alleged victim or those reasonably necessary for such transmission
of the communication.
(5) ``Evidence of a victim's records or communications'' means
testimony of a victim advocate or Department of Defense Safe
Helpline staff, or records that pertain to communications by a
victim to a victim advocate or Department of Defense Safe Helpline
staff, for the purposes of advising or providing assistance to the
victim.''
--Mil. R. Evid. 514(c) is amended to read as follows:
``(c) Who May Claim the Privilege. The privilege may be claimed
by the victim or the guardian or conservator of the victim. A person
who may claim the privilege may authorize trial counsel or a counsel
representing the victim to claim the privilege on his or her behalf.
The victim advocate or Department of Defense Safe Helpline staff who
received the communication may claim the privilege on behalf of the
victim. The authority of such a victim advocate, Department of
Defense Safe Helpline staff, guardian, conservator, or a counsel
representing the victim to so assert the privilege is presumed in
the absence of evidence to the contrary.''
--Mil. R. Evid. 514(d)(2)-(4) is amended to read as follows:
``(2) When federal law, state law, Department of Defense
regulation, or service regulation imposes a duty to report
information contained in a communication;
(3) When a victim advocate or Department of Defense Safe
Helpline staff believes that a victim's mental or emotional
condition makes the victim a danger to any person, including the
victim;
(4) If the communication clearly contemplated the future
commission of a fraud or crime, or if the services of the victim
advocate or Department of Defense Safe Helpline staff are sought or
obtained to enable or aid anyone to commit or plan to commit what
the victim knew or reasonably should have known to be a crime or
fraud;''
--Mil. R. Evid. 514(e)(2) is amended to read as follows:
``(2) Before ordering the production or admission of evidence of
a victim's records or communication, the military judge must conduct
a hearing, which shall be closed. At the hearing, the parties may
call witnesses, including the victim, and offer other relevant
evidence. The victim must be afforded a reasonable opportunity to
attend the hearing and be heard. However, the hearing may not be
unduly delayed for this purpose. The right to be heard under this
rule includes the right to be heard through counsel, including
victims' counsel under section 1044e of title 10, United States
Code. In a case before a court-martial composed of a military judge
and members, the military judge must conduct the hearing outside the
presence of the members.''
--Mil. R. Evid. 514(e)(3) is amended to read as follows:
``(3) The military judge may examine the evidence or a proffer
thereof in camera, if such examination is necessary to rule on the
production or admissibility of protected records or communications.
Prior to conducting an in camera review, the military judge must
find by a preponderance of the evidence that the moving party:
(A) showed a specific factual basis demonstrating a reasonable
likelihood that the records or communications would yield evidence
admissible under an exception to the privilege;
(B) that the requested information meets one of the enumerated
exceptions under subsection (d) of this rule;
(C) that the information sought is not merely cumulative of
other information available; and
(D) that the party made reasonable efforts to obtain the same or
substantially similar information through non-privileged sources.''
--Mil. R. Evid. 514(e)(4) is inserted following Mil. R. Evid.
514(e)(3) to read as follows:
``(4) Any production or disclosure permitted by the military
judge under this rule must be narrowly tailored to only the specific
records or communications, or portions of such records or
communications, that meet the requirements for one of the enumerated
exceptions to the privilege under subsection (d) above and are
included in the stated purpose for which the records or
[[Page 6060]]
communications are sought under subsection (e)(1)(A) above.''
--Mil. R. Evid. 514(e)(4) is renumbered as Mil. R. Evid. 514(e)(5).
--Mil. R. Evid. 514(e)(5) is renumbered as Mil. R. Evid. 514(e)(6).
f. Comments making typographical corrections were received and
those corrections were made.
g. Comments were received suggesting additional amendments to RCM
104, 105, 404A, RCM 405, 801 1103A and MREs 412 and 513. These
suggested changes were not incorporated. Several suggested changes to
the MCM as well as recommended legislative changes to UCMJ articles
were not contemplated in the proposals currently under review. Those
suggestions will be considered in the course of the 2015 annual review
of the MCM, which is required by DoD Directive 5500.17.
Dated: January 30, 2015.
Aaron Siegel,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2015-02149 Filed 2-3-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-P