450
E
Street, Northwest
SCHEDULED
HEARINGS
(Appellee)
(Appellant)
Counsel for
Appellant: Frank J. Spinner, Esq.
Counsel for
Appellee: Capt
Case Summary:
GCM conviction of indecent acts, sodomy and rape of a child.
Granted
issue questions whether Appellant received ineffective assistance of
counsel in
that his defense counsel called the victim as a witness; acknowledged
credibility; conceded that Appellant committed intercourse, indecent
acts and
sodomy; failed to call favorable sentencing witnesses; and failed to
obtain
favorable clemency matters for presentation to the convening authority.
(Appellee)
(Appellant)
Counsel for
Appellant: Capt Patrick B. Grant,
Counsel for
Appellee: Capt
Trevor B.A. Nelson,
Case Summary:
GCM
conviction of assault consummated by battery. Certified issue questions
whether
the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals erred in holding that
the
trial defense counsel did not affirmatively waive an affirmative
defense
instruction with respect to a lesser-included offense.
(Appellee)
(Appellant)
Counsel for Appellant: Capt
Anthony D. Ortiz, USAF
Counsel for Appellee:
Case Summary:
GCM conviction
of drunk
driving, ecstasy use, cocaine use, distribution of cocaine, LSD use and
obstruction of justice. Granted issue questions whether Appellant’s
substantial
rights were materially prejudiced when prosecution witnesses and trial
counsel
commented on Appellant’s request for an attorney and Appellant’s
refusal to
give consent for a search and seizure of his hair and blood.
(Appellee)
(Appellant)
Counsel for
Appellant: Capt Vicki A. Belleau,
USAF
Counsel for
Appellee: Maj Kimani R. Eason,
USAF
Case Summary:
GCM
conviction of indecent liberties with a child. Granted issues question:
(I) whether
the military judge erred to the substantial prejudice of Appellant when
he
allowed the admission of repeated instances of human lie detector
testimony and
then failed to provide prompt, curative instructions to the members;
(II)
whether the military judge erred to the substantial prejudice of
Appellant when
he allowed Dr. (A) to give improper profile evidence that children
rarely make
false claims of sexual abuse; (III) whether the military judge erred to
the
substantial prejudice of Appellant when he did not instruct the court
members
to disregard argument that trial counsel was convinced beyond a
reasonable
doubt that the child victim was telling the truth; (IV) whether the
charges and
specifications must be dismissed because the Staff Judge Advocate
excluded “all
officers who would likely be challenged if selected as members” from
the pool
of potential court members, and the convening authority, in turn,
excluded them
from the court-martial selection process; (V) whether the series of
errors
cumulatively and materially prejudiced Appellant’s substantial right to
a fair
and impartial trial thereby necessitating reversal of his convictions;
and (VI)
whether the convening authority erroneously applied Article 58b (b),
UCMJ.
(Appellee)
(Appellant)
Counsel for
Appellant: Capt Sean F. Mangan,
Counsel for
Appellee: Capt
Adam S. Kazin,
Case Summary:
GCM conviction of maltreatment, false official statement,
indecent
assault, soliciting adultery, and adultery. Granted issue questions
whether the
military judge violated Appellant’s due process rights when he
sentenced him
based upon his personal religious beliefs rather than legitimate
sentencing
principles.
(Appellee)
(Appellant)
Counsel for
Appellant: Capt Sean F. Mangan,
Counsel for
Appellee: Capt
Case Summary:
SPCM conviction for false official statement, use of a
controlled
substance, and distribution of a controlled substance. Granted issue
questions
whether Appellant’s confinement conditions, including and in particular
with
respect to his claim of having been confined with enemy prisoners of
war in
Iraq, were unlawful, and whether, in the context presented, Appellant
forfeited
his claims of unlawful post-trial punishment by failing to exhaust his
administrative remedies under United States v. White, 54 M.J.
469
(C.A.A.F. 2001).
(Appellee)
(Appellant)
Counsel for
Appellant: Capt Kathleena R.
Scarpato,
Counsel for
Appellee: Capt
W. Todd Kuchenthal,
Case
Summary: GCM conviction of conspiracy
and larceny.
Granted issues
question: (I) whether Appellant was denied his Sixth Amendment right to
confrontation when the military judge impermissibly restricted
cross-examination of a key government witness regarding the details of
a
co-conspirator’s extremely favorable plea agreement; (II) whether the
military
judge abused his discretion by refusing to give a mandatory leniency
instruction.