Legal Definitions - Military Rules of Evidence

Military Rules of Evidence (MRE)

The Military Rules of Evidence (MRE) are a specific set of legal guidelines that govern what information, testimony, and physical items can be presented and considered as evidence in military court proceedings, primarily courts-martial. These rules are designed to ensure fairness, reliability, and proper procedure within the military justice system, much like civilian rules of evidence guide proceedings in federal and state courts. They dictate how evidence must be collected, presented, and evaluated to be admissible in a military trial.

• Example 1: Challenging a Witness's Testimony

  During a court-martial for desertion, the prosecution calls a witness who claims to have heard the accused service member state an intention to leave their post permanently. The defense attorney might object to this testimony, arguing that it is "hearsay" under the MRE, meaning it's an out-of-court statement offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted, and does not fall under an exception that would allow it to be admitted. The military judge would then apply the relevant MRE provisions to decide if the testimony is permissible.

• Example 2: Admissibility of Physical Evidence

  In a case involving the alleged theft of government property, military investigators recover a stolen laptop from the accused's barracks room. For this laptop to be presented as evidence in a court-martial, the prosecution must demonstrate, according to the MRE, that it was legally seized (e.g., with proper authorization or consent) and that its "chain of custody" has been maintained. This means showing that the laptop has been properly handled and accounted for from the moment it was found until its presentation in court, ensuring it hasn't been tampered with.

• Example 3: Suppressing an Illegally Obtained Confession

  A service member accused of assault provides a confession to military police during an interrogation. Before the court-martial, the defense attorney files a motion to suppress this confession, arguing that the service member was not properly advised of their rights (similar to Miranda rights in civilian law, but specific to military personnel under Article 31 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice) before making the statement. The military judge would review the circumstances of the interrogation against the requirements of the MRE to determine if the confession was obtained legally and is therefore admissible as evidence.