United States v. McClour
2017 CAAF LEXIS 51
| C.A.A.F. | 2017Background
- Appellant Senior Airman Trentlee D. McClour was tried by a general court-martial on an abusive sexual contact charge; members convicted him and he received a BCD, 180 days confinement, forfeitures, and reduction.
- Before deliberations the military judge instructed members on reasonable doubt using language from the Air Force Benchbook, including: "if, based on your consideration of the evidence, you’re firmly convinced that the accused is guilty of the offense charged, you must find him guilty." Defense did not object at trial.
- McClour appealed, arguing that the use of the word "must" effectively directed the members to return a guilty verdict and thus violated the prohibition on directed verdicts in criminal cases.
- The Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals rejected the claim; McClour sought review by the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF).
- CAAF reviewed under the plain-error standard because no contemporaneous objection was made: appellant must show error that is clear/obvious and materially prejudices substantial rights.
Issues
| Issue | Appellant's Argument | Government's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether instructing members that they "must find" the accused guilty if they are "firmly convinced" constitutes an improper directed verdict | The "must find" language effectively directed a guilty verdict, usurping members’ factfinding and violating the prohibition on directed verdicts | The instruction, read as a whole, properly explained proof beyond a reasonable doubt and left ultimate guilt determination to the members; "must" does not remove members’ role | Instruction did not constitute a directed verdict; any error was not clear or obvious, so plain error not established; conviction affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Sullivan v. Louisiana, 508 U.S. 275 (1993) (trial judge may not direct verdict for government in criminal case)
- Martin Linen Supply Co. v. United States, 430 U.S. 564 (1977) (limits on trial-court interference with jury verdicts; discussed in context of jury verdict issues)
- United States v. Stegmeier, 701 F.3d 574 (8th Cir. 2012) (upholding burden-of-proof instruction using "must find" language as not a directed verdict)
- United States v. Mejia, 597 F.3d 1339 (D.C. Cir. 2010) (same conclusion regarding "must find" instruction)
- United States v. Bustillo, 789 F.2d 1364 (9th Cir. 1986) (finding similar instruction did not constitute plain error)
- United States v. Meeks, 41 M.J. 150 (C.M.A. 1994) (approving citation of Pattern Jury Instructions on burden-of-proof language)