United States v. England
United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals
2009 WL 6842645 (2005)
- Written by Salina Kennedy, JD
Facts
Private First Class Lynndie R. England (defendant), a personnel administrative clerk at the Baghdad Central Confinement Facility at Abu Ghraib, Iraq faced multiple charges arising from alleged misconduct. England attempted to plead guilty to most of the charges in exchange for a sentence reduction. Included in England’s guilty plea was a specification for conspiracy to commit maltreatment involving Corporal Charles Graner, an officer who served at Abu Ghraib and who was in an intimate relationship with England. The specification arose from an incident in which Graner tied a strap around the neck of a nude detainee and, using a strap as a leash, pulled the detainee out of his holding cell. Graner then handed the leash to England and took photos of her holding the leash. Prior to accepting England’s plea, the military judge conducted a providence inquiry to confirm that England understood why her actions were unlawful. During this inquiry, England testified that she and Graner had no lawful purpose for taking the photo, that they had intended to degrade and humiliate the detainee, and that Graner took the photos for his personal use and amusement. The military judge, satisfied that England was provident to the offenses, accepted her pleas and found her guilty. During the presentencing case, England’s counsel called Graner as a witness. Graner testified that his treatment of the detainee had been part of a lawful planned use of force to extract the detainee from his cell and that he had taken the photos to document the extraction as required by military-police rules. The military judge interpreted Graner’s testimony as contradicting England’s guilty plea as to the conspiracy specification. The judge reasoned that the elements of conspiracy had not been met because England and Graner disagreed about the purpose of the incident. The judge rejected England’s guilty plea as to the conspiracy specification, leading to a contested court-martial in which England was acquitted of the specification. England was convicted of several other charges and appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Tozzi, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 814,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.