United States v. McKeel
United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces
63 M.J. 81 (2006)
- Written by Salina Kennedy, JD
Facts
McKeel (defendant), a young Navy enlistee, was accused of rape and sexual assault while he was attending an initial-training school. During an interview with an investigator, McKeel admitted that he had sex with a female shipmate who was intoxicated and who he believed was unable to consent. Chief Petty Officer Leiker, the ship’s chief legal officer, offered McKeel immunity from court-martial if McKeel agreed to accept Article 15 nonjudicial punishment and to waive his right to contest his separation from the military. The offer, which McKeel accepted, was approved by the special-court-martial convening authority. McKeel pleaded guilty to rape in an Article 15 hearing, was given nonjudicial punishment, and was processed for administrative discharge. The administrative-discharge authority, who also served as the general-court-martial convening authority (GCMCA), referred a charge of rape to a general court-martial for trial. McKeel entered into a new pretrial agreement with the GCMCA that did not include a grant of immunity. Prior to entering his guilty plea, McKeel filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that he was immune from prosecution pursuant to his pretrial agreement with Leiker. The military judge denied McKeel’s motion but excluded from evidence information related to McKeel’s Article 15 hearing and his administrative separation. The judge also granted McKeel full sentencing credit for his nonjudicial punishment. The United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the military judge’s ruling, and McKeel appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Effron, J.)
Dissent (Erdmann, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 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.