Warning: mysqli_num_fields() expects parameter 1 to be mysqli_result, boolean given in /home/ucmjdef1/public_html/wp-includes/wp-db.php on line 3283

Use of providence inquiry statements in mixed plea cases

Use of providence inquiry statements in mixed plea cases

Use of providence inquiry statements in mixed plea cases

  1. militarydefenselawyers006Admissions in a plea of guilty to one offense cannot be used as evidence to support a finding of guilty of an essential element of a separate and different offense; however, the guilty plea inquiry and stipulation of fact may be used to satisfy the common elements of a greater offense if the pled to charge is LIO of the contested charge.
    United States v. Abdullah , 37 M.J. 692 (A.C.M.R. 1993); United States v. Rivera , 23 M.J. 89, 95 (C.M.A. 1986); United States v. Flores , 69 M.J. 651 (A.F. Ct. Crim. App. 2010).
  2. Plea of guilty may be used to establish common facts and elements of a greater offense within the same specification, but may not be used as proof of a separate offense. The elements of a LIO established by guilty plea (but not the accused’s admissions made in support of that plea) can be used to establish common elements of the greater offense.
    United States v. Ramelb, 44 M.J. 625 (Army Ct. Crim. App. 1996).
  3. United States v. Grijalva, 55 M.J. 223 (C.A.A.F. 2001). Admissions concerning the elements of the LIO made during providence inquiry can be considered insofar as the admissions relate to common elements of the greater offense, but it was error for the military judge to consider the accused’s admissions that pertained to different elements of the greater offense.
  • Counsel may not make inaccurate reference to law or cite legal authority to the members.
    1. United States v. McCauley , 25 C.M.R. 327 (C.M.A. 1958) (it was error for trial counsel to read from case in the Court-Martial Reports);
      United States v. Clifton , 15 M.J. 26 (C.M.A. 1983) (citing Wigmore before the panel). Findings Argument (Art and Law)