AIR FORCE INSTRUCTION 6 JUNE Law. ADMINISTRATION OF MILITARY JUSTICE. COMPLIANCE WITH THIS PUBLICATION IS MANDATORY. Supersedes AFI , 3 October Pages: Distribution: F. This instruction implements the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). and now may be found in AFI , Administration of Military Justice, and AFI ,. Nonjudicial Punishment, respectively. 1. Good order.
|Published (Last):||23 February 2017|
|PDF File Size:||4.61 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||10.70 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Time limit on appointments. Supreme Court Rule Case management pilot program for criminal cases. M A list of court member nominees may not be required if the case will ultimately be referred to a court-martial previously impaneled to try cases i. Specifically, the PHO should tell the accused and his counsel that the hearing adi the presented evidence has disclosed that the accused is reasonably suspected of offenses other than the ones charged and identify these offenses to the accused and counsel and then tell all parties that now the preliminary hearing is enlarged to encompass the additional offense.
Defendant may not be compelled.
The United States Department of More information. All documents are handled in accordance with security classification.
Although potential witnesses are normally excluded from watching the proceedings, the PHO has the authority to permit some potential witnesses e.
The day the report is delivered is not counted in calculating the 5-day period. To the extent its directions are inconsistent with other Air Force publications, the information herein prevails, in accordance with SfiPublications and Forms Management.
United States v. Graham –
Any voluntary termination of parole should More information. The GC shall ensure the preliminary hearing is recorded by a suitable government recording device. If it is impracticable for the original convening authority to continue exercising authority over the charges, the convening authority may cause the charges, even if referred, to be transmitted to a parallel convening authority.
General Provisions Governing Discovery. PO Box Seattle, More information. The PHO shall receive a copy of the recording of hearing as soon as practicable following the conclusion of the hearing for attaching to the PHO report. General Provisions Chapter 1. Based on operational necessity and mission requirements, the witness s commander may authorize the witness to testify by VTC, telephone, or similar means of remote testimony.
The goals of the alcohol and drug treatment divisions created under this Chapter include the wfi It is meant to More information.
32 CFR 884.3 – Placing member under restraint pending delivery.
The Military Rules of Evidence M. When a PHO has been delegated authority to grant delays, the period covered by the delay may be excluded by the convening authority from the day period under R. Most misdemeanor offenses are handled by municipal prosecutors; cases involving minors More information. The preliminary hearing is your primary duty until its completion.
The accused has the right to be represented in his defense by military defense counsel certified under Article 27 b and sworn under Article 42 aUCMJ. For purposes of the preliminary hearing, matters in mitigation are defined as matters that may serve to explain the circumstances surrounding a charged offense. If evidence adduced during the preliminary hearing indicates the accused committed an uncharged offense, the PHO may examine evidence and hear witnesses relating to the subject matter of such offense and make the findings and recommendations regarding such offense without the accused first having been charged with the offense.
If an important witness is unable to testify at an Article 32, UCMJ preliminary hearing and, because of the exceptional circumstances of the case, it is in the interest. Ethics and Standards of Conduct. These Rules govern the procedure in the Superior Court of the District of. A court of inquiry is one of several investigative methods available to ascertain the facts of a matter of importance to the Air Force.
The court, on its own initiative. At a judge alone special court-martial, Appellant was convicted, consistent with his plea, of attempted sexual abuse of ai child between 12 and 16 years old, in violation of Article 80, UCMJ, 10 U.
Sexual behavior is defined as any sexual behavior not encompassed by the alleged offense.