10 U.S.C. § 949f

Challenges

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 10 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a)Challenges Authorized.—The military judge and primary or alternate members of a military commission under this chapter may be challenged by the accused or trial counsel for cause stated to the military commission. The military judge shall determine the relevance and validity of challenges for cause, and may not receive a challenge to more than one person at a time. Challenges by trial counsel shall ordinarily be presented and decided before those by the accused are offered.(b)Peremptory Challenges.—The accused and trial counsel are each entitled to one peremptory challenge, but the military judge may not be challenged except for cause. Nothing in this section prohibits the military judge from awarding to each party such additional peremptory challenges as may be required in the interests of justice.(c)Challenges Against Additional Members.—Whenever additional members are detailed to a military commission under this chapter, and after any challenges for cause against such additional members are presented and decided, the accused and trial counsel are each entitled to one peremptory challenge against members not previously subject to peremptory challenge.(Added Pub. L. 111–84, div. A, title XVIII, § 1802, Oct. 28, 2009, 123 Stat. 2586; amended Pub. L. 113–66, div. A, title X, § 1031(b), Dec. 26, 2013, 127 Stat. 850.)Editorial NotesPrior Provisions

A prior section 949f, added Pub. L. 109–366, § 3(a)(1), Oct. 17, 2006, 120 Stat. 2613, related to challenges, prior to the general amendment of this chapter by Pub. L. 111–84.

Amendments

2013—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 113–66, § 1031(b)(1), inserted “primary or alternate” before “members”.

Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 113–66, § 1031(b)(2), inserted at end “Nothing in this section prohibits the military judge from awarding to each party such additional peremptory challenges as may be required in the interests of justice.”

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 1 case, 2014–2014 · leading case: Al-Nashiri v. Obama, 76 F. Supp. 3d 218 (D.D.C. 2014).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Al-Nashiri v. Obama, 76 F. Supp. 3d 218 (D.D.C. 2014). “10 U.S.C. § 949f. He will be entitled to invoke the presumption of innocence, to engage in discovery, to obtain and present exculpatory evidence, and to call witnesses on his behalf.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.