Aggravation evidence” in stipulations of fact

  1. uscourtmartiallawyers75United States v. Glazier , 26 M.J. 268 (C.M.A. 1988).
    1. Inadmissible evidence may be stipulated to (subject to RCM 811(b) “interests of justice” and no government overreaching).
    2. Stipulation should be unequivocal that all parties agree stipulation is “admissible.”
  2. United States v. DeYoung , 29 M.J. 78 (C.M.A. 1989). Military judge must affirmatively rule on defense objections, even if the stipulation states that the contents are admissible. Parties cannot usurp the MJ’s role.
  3. United States v. Vargas , 29 M.J. 968 (A.C.M.R. 1990). The stipulated facts constitute uncharged misconduct not closely related to the facts alleged; therefore, they were “generally” inadmissible. BUT, the accused agreed to permit their use in return for favorable sentence limits, and there was no evidence of government overreaching.