A Comparative Analysis of Guilty Plea Inquiries in Federal Civilian and Military Practice
JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL'S SCHOOL CHARLOTTESVILE VA
Pagination or Media Count:
This thesis compares the guilty plea providence inquiry at courts-martial with the guilty plea inquiry in Federal district courts. The thesis offers a history of the recent evolution of both practices followed by an analysis of similarities and differences. The thesis examines the advice to accused persons concerning the nature of the charge to which they pleaded guilty and the manner in which military and civilian judges develop the factual basis to support a guilty plea. The author concludes that specific legislative and judicial revisions of military practice should be considered to modernize military practice, to avoid unnecessary appellate action, and, most importantly, to accord sufficient respect to an accuseds voluntary and intelligent decision to plead guilty.
- Government and Political Science
- Sociology and Law
- Military Forces and Organizations