Standard of review
United States v. Clark
, 69 M.J. 438 (C.A.A.F. 2011).

  1. militarylawyersl32015Whether there has been an improper reference to the exercise of a constitutional right is a question of law that is reviewed de novo.
  2. If the defense counsel objected at trial, the test for prejudice is harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
  3. If the defense counsel did not object at trial, apply plain error analysis.
    United States v. Clark
    , 69 M.J. 438 (C.A.A.F. 2011). To find plain error, the appellant must show:

    1. Error;
    2. The error was plain or obvious; and
    3. The error material prejudiced the accused’s substantial rights.