Case Explained: Morris v. Curtis

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit Filed: 2026-06-15 Docket: 5:23-CV-03133-JWL) The Tenth Circuit affirmed the denial of habeas relief to a soldier challenging his court-martial convictions for sex offenses involving an underage girl under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The court applied the standard from *Lips v. Commandant*, requiring the petitioner to demonstrate that the military courts failed to provide “full and fair consideration” of his arguments, as those issues had already been rejected by the Army Court of Criminal Appeals and the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces. Regarding the claim that the court-martial lacked a unanimous verdict requirement, the court found the military tribunals provided full and fair consideration despite concise denials, noting that it does not assess whether the correct legal standard was applied when determining fairness. On the claim regarding denial of counsel of choice at a preliminary hearing, the court held that habeas relief was unavailable because preliminary hearings in court-martials are statutory creations rather than constitutional requirements; consequently, there is no substantial constitutional right to counsel at such proceedings. Finally, regarding the claim that exculpatory evidence was withheld, the court determined this issue was fact-intensive and therefore not suitable for federal habeas review when previously adjudicated by military courts. As a result, the petitioner’s request for relief was denied. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.