United States v. Hutchins
2011 CAAF LEXIS 25
C.A.A.F.2011Background
- Hutchins was convicted by general court-martial of conspiracy, making a false official statement, unpremeditated murder, and larceny; sentence included dishonorable discharge and confinement.
- On appeal, the Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals reversed findings and sentence, citing improper termination of Captain Bass and convening deficiencies, and ordered a post-trial factfinding under DuBay.
- CCA treated the termination as presumption of prejudice and ultimately set aside the findings and sentence, authorizing a rehearing.
- The Government argues Bass’s impending separation from active duty provided good cause to sever the attorney-client relationship; the defense disputes any such good cause and asserts prejudice.
- Record shows Bass announced separation (EAS), approval occurred, Bass left active duty around May 2007, and Cosgrove replaced him; the June 11 hearing record lacked clear authority basis for Bass’s withdrawal.
- This Court holds that the trial record does not establish valid good cause for severance, no inherent prejudice is shown, and the case must be remanded for Article 66(c) review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the CCA erred in finding no good cause for severance | Hutchins (plaintiff) contends Bass’s separation constitutes good cause. | The Government contends separation from active duty normally terminates representation or provides good cause. | No valid good cause established. |
| Whether the military judge adequately record-justified Bass’s withdrawal under R.C.M. 505/506 | Record failures harmed Hutchins’ rights by not properly documenting severance. | Severance was administrative and not prejudicial. | Record did not justify withdrawal properly. |
| Whether the severance analysis and potential prejudice require automatic reversal | Presumption of prejudice should apply given mis-handling of counsel termination. | No structural prejudice; any prejudice must be shown under Article 59(a). | Prejudice not shown to be material; not reversible on this basis. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Wiechmann, 67 M.J. 456 (C.A.A.F. 2009) (guidance on severance and prejudice standards)
- United States v. Iverson, 5 M.J. 440 (C.M.A. 1978) (prejudice presumed under some severance errors)
- United States v. Baca, 27 M.J. 110 (C.M.A. 1988) (prejudice presumed in certain attorney-client severance cases)
- United States v. Acton, 38 M.J. 330 (C.M.A. 1993) (prejudice evaluated in light of facts and circumstances)
- United States v. Gnibus, 21 M.J. 1 (C.M.A. 1985) (trial-level severance issues and impact on defense)
- United States v. Eason, 21 C.M.A. 335 (1972) (limits on severance based on government actions)