## Facts

- An Air Force captain also served as a Boy Scout scoutmaster and was accused of a consensual sexual relationship with a scout older than 16.
- The wing commander at Tinker Air Force Base was also an unpaid Boy Scouts district chairman with limited duties, largely attending meetings periodically as part of community relations.
- The commander learned of the allegations through his Boy Scouts connection; civilian authorities declined to pursue the matter.
- Acting in his military capacity as a special court-martial convening authority, the commander initiated an inquiry and an Article 32 investigation.
- After reviewing the Article 32 report, the commander recommended referral to a general court-martial; the accused was tried by general court-martial and convicted.
- After confinement, the accused asserted he first learned of the commander’s specific Boy Scouts title and argued the commander had an undisclosed personal interest that disqualified him from convening and referring the case.
- A DuBay hearing was ordered to develop facts on disqualification and prejudice; the case proceeded to review by the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces.

## Issues

1. Whether the commander’s Boy Scouts district-chairman role and receipt of allegations through that role made him an “accuser” with an interest other than official interest, disqualifying him from convening/referring the case under the UCMJ.
2. If there was error or nondisclosure regarding the commander’s Boy Scouts role, whether the accused made a colorable showing of possible prejudice requiring relief.

## Decision

- The court affirmed and declined to set aside the conviction based on convening-authority disqualification.
- The court held the commander was not an “accuser” because the record did not show a disqualifying personal interest beyond official command responsibilities.
- The court held that, even assuming some error or nondisclosure, the accused failed to show a colorable possibility of prejudice from the commander’s participation.

## Legal Principles

- Under Article 1(9), UCMJ, an “accuser” includes a person who has an interest other than an official interest in the prosecution; an accuser may not convene or refer charges.
- A convening authority is disqualified when he is so closely connected to the offense that a reasonable person would conclude he has a personal interest in the matter.
- A commander’s volunteer or community-service role in an organization connected to the allegations, without more, does not automatically establish a disqualifying personal interest.
- When convening-authority disqualification or related nondisclosure is alleged, relief generally requires at least a colorable showing of possible prejudice (e.g., that a different convening authority likely would have taken materially different action affecting the outcome).

## Conclusion

The court held that a wing commander’s limited, unpaid Boy Scouts leadership role and receipt of allegations through that connection did not, without additional facts showing personal stake or animus, disqualify him as an “accuser,” and that the accused was not entitled to relief absent a colorable showing of possible prejudice.


United States v. Dinges, 55 M.J. 308 (C.A.A.F. 2001)