Misc Pub 27-8 Legal Handbook Commander’s 2019
Download 4.49 Mb. View original pdf
|
ArmyDemLogProgramBriefing-Jan17
- Navigate this page:
- Return to Table of Contents 115
| 3. Legal Review (Para. 2-7) All administrative investigations and boards directed under AR 15-6 require a legal review. The legal review determines whether the investigation complies with requirements in the appointing order and other legal requirements, what effects of any investigation errors would have, whether sufficient evidence (preponderance of the evidence) supports the findings (including findings of no fault, no loss, or no wrongdoing) and recommendations, and whether the recommendations are consistent with the findings. The legal review should also advise the appointing authority whether the evidence supports any additional relevant findings, or suggests that additional investigation is appropriate to address additional concerns. Appointing errors occur when the appointing authority does not have the authority to appoint the particular investigation. If that is the case, the proceedings area nullity unless an appropriate authority ratifies the appointment. Substantial errors are errors that have a material adverse effect on an individual’s substantial rights. Harmless errors are defects in the proceedings that do not have a material adverse effect on an individual’s substantial rights. The preference is to not have the legal advisor that advised the IO from also completing the legal review. It is recommended that a second attorney conduct an independent legal review in high-profile cases, complex cases, or cases in which the legal advisor’s involvement in the case prevents him or her from conducting an independent legal review. If a judge advocate finds an investigation legally insufficient, he or she should work with the IO to try to remedy the errors. Under no circumstances should the legal advisor or the Return to Table of Contents 115 judge advocate conducting the legal review rewrite any portion of the report of investigation without the IO’s permission, or try to hide anything from the report from the appointing authority or anyone else. If the legal insufficiencies cannot be resolved, the judge advocate should prepare an appropriate legal review describing the errors for the appointing authority. Just like the IO’s report, however, the appointing authority is not necessarily bound by the legal review. Download 4.49 Mb. Share with your friends:
|