450
E Street, Northwest
SCHEDULED
HEARINGS
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
(Appellee)
(Appellant)
Counsel for Appellant: Maj
Shannon A. Bennett, USAF
Counsel for Appellee: Capt
Jason M. Kellhofer, USAF
Case
Summary: GCM conviction of
possession,
use and distribution of controlled substances.
Granted issue questions whether the charge and specifications
should be
dismissed for a lack of personal jurisdiction.
NOTE: Counsel for each side will be allotted 20 minutes to present oral argument in this case.
Followed by:
(Appellant) (Appellee)
Counsel
for Appellant: Capt Jamie L. Mendelson, USAF
Counsel
for Appellee: Dwight H. Sullivan, Esq.
Case
Summary:
At trial, the military judge granted a defense motion to suppress the
results
of the urinalysis and the subsequent statement of the accused. The government appealed the ruling of the
military
judge under Article 62, UCMJ, however, the Court of Criminal Appeals
dismissed
the appeal. The court concluded that the
testimony supported the finding of the military judge that the accused’s urine sample was not taken pursuant to a
valid
inspection because the officer who issued the order did not have the
authority
to do so. The Judge Advocate General
of
the Air Force certified the issue of whether the military judge abused
his
discretion in granting the defense motion to suppress all evidence
resulting
from the urinalysis test.
NOTE: Counsel for each side will be allotted 20 minutes to present oral argument in this case.
(Appellee)
(Appellant)
Counsel for Appellant: LCDR
Necia L. Chambliss, USCGR
Counsel for Appellee:
LCDR Patrick M. Flynn, USCG
Case
Summary: SPCM conviction
of fraudulent enlistment, false official statement, damage to military
property, reckless driving, use of marijuana and cocaine, wrongful
introduction
of marijuana and cocaine, distribution of cocaine and marijuana,
leaving the
scene of an accident, and communicating a threat. Granted
issue questions whether Appellant’s
plea to fraudulent enlistment (Charge I) was improvident because the
military
judge failed to elicit facts sufficient to establish that Appellant
knew he
lied about a material fact relevant to his qualifications for
enlistment.
NOTE: Counsel for each side will be allotted 20 minutes to present oral argument in this case.
Followed by:
(Appellee)
(Appellant)
Counsel for Appellant: Capt
S. Babu Kaza, USMC
Counsel for Appellee: LT Timothy H.
Delgado, JAGC, USN
Case Summary:
GCM conviction of maiming,
and making a false official statement.
Granted issues question: (1) whether the lower court erred in
stating
that Appellant had received a dishonorable discharge at trial, when the
members
sentenced him to a bad-conduct discharge, and the convening authority
approved
only a bad-conduct discharge; (2) whether the lower court erred in
finding that
the military judge’s decision to allow, over defense objection, a
nonexpert
NCIS agent to provide expert testimony to the members was harmless,
where this
was in violation of Military Rule of Evidence 701(c), and the
Government has
conceded that this testimony was both material to its case and was of
high
quality.
NOTE: Counsel for each side will be allotted 20
minutes to present oral argument in this case.
9:00a.m.:
(Appellee)
(Appellant)
Counsel for Appellant:
Capt Patrick B. Grant,
Counsel for Appellee: Capt W. Todd
Kuchenthal,
Case Summary: GCM
conviction of aggravated assault and adultery.
Granted issue questions whether the military judge abused his
discretion
by accepting Appellant’s guilty pleas to specifications 1 and 2 of
Charge I,
aggravated assault, where Appellant did not admit facts that
objectively
supported his pleas during the providence inquiry, and introduced
evidence that
is substantially inconsistent with his pleas during presentencing.
NOTE: Counsel for each side will be allotted 20
minutes to present oral argument in this case.
9:00a.m.
(Appellee)
(Appellant)
Counsel for Appellant:
Frank J. Spinner, Esq.
Counsel for Appellee: LT Ronald Seely, USCG
Case Summary: GCM
conviction of assault with a means or force likely to produce grievous
bodily
harm and conduct unbecoming an officer.
Granted issues question: (1) whether the Coast Guard Court of
Criminal
Appeals erred in applying a Chapman-type harmless-error analysis as
opposed to
a structural-type error analysis after it concluded that the military
judge
committed an error of constitutional dimension when he instructed the
members
that a person who has engaged in uninformed and unprotected sexual
intercourse
while HIV positive has committed an offensive touching; and (2)
whether, after
the Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals set aside a conviction of the
greater
offense of aggravated assault, the Court was prohibited from affirming
a
conviction of the lesser included offense of assault consummated by a
battery
where both parties had affirmatively waived any instruction on the
lesser
included offense and the military judge did not instruct the members on
the
lesser included offense.
NOTE: Counsel for
each side will be allotted 30
minutes to present oral argument in this case.
Followed by:
(Appellee) (Appellant)
Counsel for Appellant: LT
Heather L. Cassidy, JAGC, USN
Counsel for Appellee:
Maj James W. Weirick, USMC
Case Summary:
GCM conviction of assault
and assault with a deadly weapon. Granted issue questions whether the
lower
Court erred by failing to award Appellant additional confinement credit
or
other meaningful relief due to the unduly rigorous brig conditions and
the
improper denial of necessary medical care.
NOTE:
Counsel for each side will
be allotted 20 minutes to present oral argument in this case.
9:00 a.m
(Appellee)
(Appellant)
Counsel for Appellant: Capt Vicki A. Belleau,
USAF
Counsel for Appellee: Maj Matthew S. Ward,
USAF
Case Summary: GCM
conviction of making a false official statement, reckless endangerment,
and
obstruction of justice. Granted issue
questions whether the evidence is legally insufficient to sustain
Appellant’s
conviction of Charge I and its specification, false official statement,
Article
107, UCMJ, where the statements were not “official” statements.
NOTE:
Counsel for each side will be allotted 20 minutes to present oral
argument in this case.
Followed by:
(Appellee) (Appellant)
Counsel for Appellant: Capt Griffin
Counsel for Appellee: Capt Jason M.
Kellhoffer, USAF
Case Summary: GCM conviction of use of marijuana on
divers
occasions, and use of percocet. Granted
issue questions since two of three alleged uses of marijuana were based
on
uncorroborated confessions and Appellant’s conviction for using
marijuana on
divers occasions was accordingly transformed into a single use
conviction by
the AFCCA, whether United States v. Seider and United
States v.
Walters prohibit affirming even a single use of marijuana because
the
members could have based their “on divers occasions” conviction on the
two
uncorroborated confessions and found
Appellant not guilty of the alleged use now used by the AFCCA to affirm
the
specification.
NOTE:
Counsel for each side will be allotted 20 minutes to present oral
argument in this case.
(Appellee)
(Appellant)
Counsel for Appellant: LCDR Kristina B. Reeves, JAGC, USN
Counsel for Appellee: Maj Brian K.
Keller, USMC
Case Summary:
GCM conviction of conspiracy,
violation of a general order, making a false official statement and
false
official records, and using marijuana. Granted
issues question: (1) whether the military judge abused his discretion
by
failing to recuse himself after he presided over four companion cases
and when
he provided sentencing advice to the Staff Judge Advocate regarding the
facts
associated with Appellant’s court-martial; and (2) whether the lower
court
erred by failing to disapprove the bad-conduct discharge when such
relief would
have directly and reasonably remedied the violation of Appellant’s
right to
speedy post-trial processing.
NOTE:
Counsel for each side will
be allotted 20 minutes to present oral argument in this case.
Followed by:
(Appellee)
(Appellant)
Counsel for Appellant: LT
Kathleen L. Kadlec, JAGC, USN
Counsel for Appellee: Capt Geoffrey S. Shows, USMC
Case Summary:
GCM conviction of possession
of a deadly weapon, larceny, and obtaining phone services by false
pretenses. Granted issues question: (1)
whether the lower court properly evaluated prejudice after it found
that the
trial counsel erroneously authenticated the record; (2) whether the
lower court
erred in finding no due process violation where 2,484 days elapsed
between the
adjournment of Appellant’s trial and completion of Article 66, UCMJ,
review,
including 734 days in panel.
NOTE:
Counsel will be allotted
20 minutes to present oral argument in this case.