Beatty v. Dufief

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that members’ statements made during deliberations about the possibility that the accused might be paroled did not fall into one of the exceptions to the M.R.E. 606(b) prohibition and thus, they were not competent to impeach the accused’s sentence
• holding that defense counsel’s erroneous advice that a post-trial session posed a risk of an increase in the appellant’s sentence and his decision based on this belief constituted “deficient performance within the meaning of Strickland” but finding no prejudice
• holding defense counsel advice concerning the increase of sentence on reconsideration was erroneous but not prejudicial
• reserving the issue of whether a member purporting to “speak authoritatively as an expert” during deliberations would constitute extraneous prejudicial information
• “[E]vidence of infor- mation acquired by a court member during deliberations from a third party or from outside reference materials may be extraneous prejudicial information which is admis- sible under Mil.R.Evid. 606(b

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).