United States v. Morgan
ACM S32365
| A.F.C.C.A. | Apr 13, 2017Background
- Appellant was tried by special court-martial and convicted of five specifications of assault consummated by a battery; sentenced to BCD, 3 months confinement, reduction to E-1; convening authority approved.
- Appellant was selected for involuntary separation via QFRB with an effective separation date of 29 Sept 2014; a DD Form 214 reflecting that date was signed on 9 Sept 2014 and accessible in an electronic personnel system.
- Base legal office sought to place Appellant on administrative hold pending court-martial on 11 Sept and requested a six-month extension of active duty on 24 Sept; on 26 Sept the separation order was revoked via a change to administrative orders.
- There was no evidence Appellant completed final out-processing, received a final accounting of pay, or had physical delivery of a DD Form 214 on or after the effective separation date.
- Appellant moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, arguing he had been discharged before trial; the military judge denied the motion and the court of criminal appeals affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the court-martial lacked personal jurisdiction because Appellant was lawfully discharged before trial | Appellant: he accessed a DD Form 214 dated 29 Sept 2014 (on 9 Sept) and thus was discharged prior to trial | Government: separation was revoked before its effective date, no delivery of DD-214 after separation date, no final pay or out-processing — Appellant remained on active duty | Court: No valid discharge; separation revoked before effective date, no delivery/final pay/out-processing; personal jurisdiction existed |
Key Cases Cited
- Smith v. Vanderbush, 47 M.J. 56 (C.A.A.F.) (servicemembers not entitled to unconditional discharge; retention for court-martial permitted)
- United States v. Melanson, 53 M.J. 1 (C.A.A.F.) (three-factor test for lawful discharge: valid discharge certificate, final pay ready, completed administrative clearance)
- United States v. Hart, 66 M.J. 273 (C.A.A.F.) (standard of review for personal-jurisdiction factual findings)
- United States v. Harmon, 63 M.J. 98 (C.A.A.F.) (delivery of DD-214 requires physical delivery and intent to discharge)
- United States v. King, 27 M.J. 327 (C.M.A.) (discharge delivery and intent requirements)
- United States v. Batchelder, 41 M.J. 337 (C.A.A.F.) (date/time a discharge takes effect at 2400 on separation date)