Jamar M. Davis, Petitioner v. United States

Jamar Davis is asking the Supreme Court to review a military criminal case from the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces. The question is whether two parts of 10 U.S.C. § 920b let the government avoid proving specific intent (a purposeful mental state) for "intentionally exposing . . . genitalia . . . to a child."

The case is still at the petition stage, and no oral argument is scheduled. The petition asks whether subsections (d)(1) and (d)(2) of 10 U.S.C. § 920b remove the government's burden to prove specific intent.

The answer could shape how military prosecutors must prove charges under this law. For a service member in a court-martial (military criminal court), the case could affect whether the government must show a deliberate intent, not just that an act occurred.

The petition asks whether two parts of 10 U.S.C. § 920b let the government avoid proving specific intent. In simple terms, it asks what mental state prosecutors must prove.

Service members prosecuted under this military law could be affected, along with military judges and prosecutors. The case concerns how much proof of intent those cases require.

The Supreme Court must decide whether to hear the case. No oral argument is scheduled yet, so the next sign of movement is a scheduling or review order.