450
E Street, Northwest
SCHEDULED
HEARINGS
______________________________________________________________
(Appellee)
(Appellant)
Counsel for
Appellant: David P. Sheldon, Esq.
Counsel for
Appellee: Maj Wilbur Lee, USMC
Case Summary: GCM conviction of murder, assault with the
intent to
inflict grievous bodily harm, assault with a dangerous weapon, and
obstruction
of justice.
Granted issues question: (I) whether the
military judge erred by failing to properly instruct the panel
regarding
Appellant’s right as an aggressor to exercise self-defense in an
escalation of
force situation, and (II) whether Appellant was provided with a timely
post-trial and appellate review under the Uniform Code of Military
Justice and
the United States Constitution.
(Appellee)
(Appellant)
Counsel
for Appellant: Maj Sandra K.
Whittington, USAF
Counsel
for Appellee: Maj Heather L.
Mazzeno,
USAFR
Case
Summary: GCM
conviction of
conspiracy, housebreaking, and opening and stealing mail matter.
Granted issue questions whether the Air Force
Court of Criminal Appeals erred in finding that none of the staff judge
advocate’s comments in his addendum to the staff judge advocate’s
review
constituted new matter.
NOTE: Each side is allotted 15 minutes to present
oral argument.
(Appellant)
(Appellee)
Counsel for
Appellant: Maj Matthew S. Ward, USAF
Counsel for
Appellee: David P. Sheldon,
Esq.
Case Summary:
Appellee was
charged with one specification of
rape and one specification of indecent assault at a GCM.
In spite of being served with subpoenas and a
warrant of attachment, a civilian social worker refused to produce
documents
pertaining to her counseling sessions with the alleged rape victim. The
----------------------------------------------------------------------
(Appellee)
(Appellant)
Counsel for
Appellant: Capt Seth A. Director,
Counsel for
Appellee: Maj
William J. Nelson,
Case
Summary: GCM
conviction of
attempted carnal knowledge, sodomy, and indecent acts with a child.
Granted issue questions whether the U.S. Army
Court of Criminal Appeals erred when it concluded that the
implementation of a
suspension of reduction in pay grade for six months would still
constitute
specific performance five years after Appellant’s trial.
NOTE:
Each side is allotted 15 minutes to submit
oral argument.
(Appellee)
(Appellant)
Counsel for
Appellant: Capt Stephen P.
Watkins, JA
Counsel for
Appellee: Capt Flor M.
Suarez, JA
Case
Summary: SPCM
conviction of
unauthorized absence.
Granted issue
questions whether the military judge erred in accepting the Appellant’s
guilty
plea to a period of unauthorized absence from
NOTE: Each side is
allotted 15 minutes to submit oral
argument.
(Appellee)
(Appellant)
Counsel for Appellant: LT
Brian L. Mizer, JAGC, USNR
Counsel for
Appellee: LT Kathleen A.
Helmann, JAGC,
USNR
Case Summary: GCM conviction
of conspiracy, violation of orders, making a false official statement,
and
drunk on duty. Granted issues question: (I)
whether Appellant was denied the
opportunity to defend himself against Charge I where the military
judge’s
findings of guilty by exceptions and substitutions resulted in a
material
variance; (II) whether the military judge erred to the substantial
prejudice of
Appellant when he failed to suppress Appellant’s statement in
accordance with
this Court’s ruling in United States v. McOmber, 1 M.J. 380
(C.M.A.
1976), and the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution; and
(III)
whether Appellant has been denied his due process right to timely
review of his
appeal.