Trial Practice Note: Statute of Limitations

United States v. Lopez de Victoria, 65 M.J. 521 (Army Ct.Crim.App. 2007), rev. granted, __ M.J. __, No. 07-6004/AR, Daily Journal (C.A.A.F. Oct. 4, 2007).

United States v. Ratliff, __ M.J. ___, No. NMCCA 200700512 (N-M. Ct. Crim. App. Oct. 25, 2007).

These two cases discuss the impact of the 2003 and 2006 amendments to Article 43. The changes effectively extended the statute of limitations for child abuse offenses. Subsequent to those changes a question has arisen about the impact on cases "for which the original statutory period had not expired when the extensions were enacted." See CAAFLog. Both Ratliff and Lopez de Victoria decide the issue for the Army and the Navy.

On 14 November 2007, C.A.A.F. will hear oral argument in de Victoria. C.A.A.F. provides the following case summary.

Case Summary: GCM conviction of making a false official statement, indecent acts with a child and indecent liberties with a child. In a post-trial Article 39(a) session, the military judge ruled that the statute of limitations barred the convictions for indecent acts and liberties with a child because a 2003 congressional amendment did not apply retroactively to offenses committed before the date of the amendment. In an appeal under Article 62, UCMJ, the Army Court of Criminal Appeals held that the trial judge erred. The granted issue questions whether the Army Court of Criminal Appeals erred in holding that the November 2003 congressional amendment to Article 43(b) of the UCMJ applies retroactively to offenses committed before the effective date of the amendment that were not time-barred as of that date, but that were time-barred under the previous statute of limitations when received by the officer exercising summary court-martial jurisdiction. The Court also specified the issue of whether and how this Court has statutory authority to exercise jurisdiction over interlocutory appeals under either Article 67(a) (2) or (3), UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 867 (a) (2), (3) (2000), from decisions of the Courts of Criminal Appeals under Article 62, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 862 (2000), and whether, as a matter of law, this Court’s decision in United States v. Tucker, 20 M.J. 52, 53 (C.M.A. 1985), should be overturned.

For those vitally interested in the issue of Writ jurisdiction, note the specified issue.