-
43 M.J. 282 Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces September 29, 1995 Nos. 94-5008; CMR No. 30025Cited by 26 Dissent · Crawford
On cross-examination as to the loss of the seven samples, which were all listed in one document, the defense asked: Q: Would you agree, doctor, that losing seven positive results, placing them in a negative position, would be grossly
negligent on the part of whoever did it?
A: Well it is negligent, no doubt about it, yes. Q: Not only negligent, doctor; it would be grossly negligent, wouldn’t it? A: Well, if you want to characterize it that way, yes.
-
44 M.J. 254 Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces August 13, 1996 Nos. 95-0543; Crim. App. No. 92 1364
In response to this motion, defense counsel stated his intention of calling Doctors Neuman and Arthur on the issue of medical negligence by the attending medical personnel.
Both doctors had written reports which were highly critical of the emergency team’s actions at the scene. Dr.
In Reveles , we held the defense had not made a sufficient proffer to justify producing the medical doctor.
-
58 M.J. 305 Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces June 23, 2003 No. 98-0146/AF
THE NEGLIGENCE OF THE AIR FORCE DOCTORS WHO TREATED APPELLANT WAS A SUFFICIENT INTERVENING PROXIMATE CAUSE TO RELIEVE HER OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY; AND/OR D.
Even if the doctors negligently failed to diagnose Appellant’s pregnancy on April 7, April 19, and July 3, their negligence was, at best, a contributing cause.
Notwithstanding any negligence by the doctors before she went into labor, her lack of due care for the safety of her baby, once labor began, “play[ed] a material role in the victim’s decease.” Romero, 1 M.J. at 229 . D.
-
49 M.J. 104 Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces September 23, 1998 Nos. 97-0616; Crim.App. No. 95-02208
MJ: Counsel, in your offer do you intend — are you trying to offer evidence that the doctor was somewhat negligent in his treatment? DC: Not this doctor, sir. Sir, if I may make a very brief offer of proof.
-
50 M.J. 410 Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces June 14, 1999 No. 98-0146/A
AIRMAN RILEY WAS DENIED THE RIGHT TO HAVE HER GUILT OR INNOCENCE DETERMINED BY THE MEMBERS SINCE THE MEMBERS, HAVING CONVICTED HER OF UNPREMEDITATED MURDER, NEVER, PURSUANT TO THE MILITARY JUDGE’S INSTRUCTIONS, CONSIDERED WHETHER THE NEGLIGENCE
OF THE AIR FORCE DOCTORS WAS A SUFFICIENT INTERVENING PROXIMATE CAUSE TO RELIEVE HER OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY; D.