These cases raise basic constitutional issues of the utmost concern. it also calls into question the role of the military under our system of government. it involves the power of Congress to expose civilians to trial by military tribunals, under military regulations and procedures, for offenses against the United States.And thereby depriving her of trial in civilian courts, under civilian laws and procedures and with all the safeguards of the Bill of Rights. Notwithstanding, she was tried by the court-martial with-out a grand jury, the dependent alleged that she was denied a right to a jury tried and so right to have her indictment presented to a grand jury pursuant to the constitution. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court interpreted the law as saying that any persons living with armed serviceman of the United States in a foreign country right cannot constitutionally be applied in capital cases to the trial of citizen dependent. In another word, she is to be tried as a serviceman or woman.
Facts/ Procedural History
…show more content…
Clarice Covert (354 U.S.1 (1957)). Mrs. Covert was civilian dependent of an armed serviceman. In 1957 Mrs. Covert killed her husband while they were on the airbase in the United Kingdom. Mrs. Covert Counsel contended that she was insane at the time she killed her husband, but the military tribunal found her guilty of murder and sentenced her to life imprisonment base on the Status of Forces in Article 2 (11) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).The judgment was affirmed by the Air Force Board of Review, 16 CMR 465, but was reversed by the Court of Military Appeals, 6 U.S.C.M.A 48, because of prejudicial errors concerning the defense of insanity. While Mrs. Covert was being held in this country pending a proposed retrial by court-martial in the District of Columbia, her counsel petitioned the District Court for a writ of habeas corpus to set her free on the ground that the Constitution forbade her trial by military