UNITED STATES COURT OF
APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
No. 05-020
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No. 05-0074/NA.
No. 05-0075/AF.
No. 05-0076/AF.
No. 05-0077/AF.
No. 05-0078/AF.
No. 05-0079/AF.
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No. 04-0723/NA.
No. 04-0792/AR.
No. 05-0013/AR.
No. 05-0015/AR.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
No. 05-019
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No. 05-0073/AR.
UNITED STATES COURT OF
APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
No. 05-018
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No. 05-0069/MC.
No. 05-0070/NA.
No. 05-0071/NA.
No. 05-0072/MC.
UNITED STATES COURT OF
APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
No. 05-017
HEARINGS
No. 04-0340/MC.
No. 04-8025/MC.
ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW
No. 04-0336/AF.
I. IN LIGHT OF CRAWFORD v. WASHINGTON, 124
S.Ct. 1354 (2004), WHETHER THE AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS ERRED BY
FINDING THAT THE CONFRONTATION CLAUSE OF THE SIXTH AMENDMENT WAS NOT IMPLICATED
WHERE AN ALLEGED ACCOMPLICE'S TESTIMONIAL STATEMENT TO INVESTIGATORS WAS USED
AS SUBSTANTIVE EVIDENCE OF APPELLANT'S GUILT AFTER THE ACCOMPLICE COULD NOT
REMEMBER THE EVENTS THAT WERE REPORTED IN HIS WRITTEN STATEMENT.
II. WHETHER THE AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
ERRED WHEN IT FOUND THAT AN ALLEGED ACCOMPLICE'S WRITTEN STATEMENT TO
INVESTIGATORS UNDER MIL.R.EVID. 804(b)(3) WAS TRULY SELF-INCULPATORY WHERE THE
ACCOMPLICE REALIZED IN ADVANCE THAT OTHER CO-ACTORS HAD ALREADY GIVEN
STATEMENTS TO INVESTIGATORS AND HIS WRITTEN STATEMENT INDICATED HIS DESIRE TO
CURRY FAVOR WITH AUTHORITIES.
III. WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE ERRED BY ADMITTING
EVIDENCE OF UNCHARGED MISCONDUCT UNDER MIL.R.EVID. 404(b) AND 403 WHERE THE
ONLY EVIDENCE OF AN ALLEGED OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE WAS THE CHANCE TIMING OF THE
WITNESS WITH THE TRIAL DEFENSE COUNSEL TO MAKE AN AFFIDAVIT RECANTING
SIGNIFICANT TESTIMONY.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED
No. 04-0569/AF.
No. 04-0593/MC.
No. 04-0597/AR.
No. 04-0654/AR.
No. 04-0655/AF.
No. 04-0681/AF.
No. 04-0705/AF.
No. 04-0706/AF.
No. 04-0725/AR.
No. 04-0740/AF.
No. 04-0742/MC.
No. 04-0747/NA.
No. 04-0748/MC.
No. 04-0767/AR.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No. 05-0067/AR.
No. 05-0068/NA.
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No. 02-0060/MC.
No. 03-0590/AR.
1. A discussion of the various forms of
restitution identified by Appellant in Appendix B, paragraph 6, and the
attachment thereto, including but not limited to: how much was taken and
from whom; when the larcenies occurred; the maximum punishment or potential
range of maximum punishment; relevant provisions of the pretrial agreement; how
much was repaid and to whom; when the repayments were made; and other pertinent
information from the record of trial.
2. An analysis of the impact of such matters
on:
a.
Whether there is good cause to review the legal sufficiency of the
advice regarding restitution in the staff judge advocate's post-trial
recommendation; and
b.
Whether there is good cause to review an issue of ineffective assistance
of counsel both at trial and post-trial relative to the restitution purportedly
made both before and after trial;
That appellate defense counsel additionally will provide this Court with an
affidavit from Appellant and such other documents as may be pertinent to the
issue of Appellant's restitution. Copies of the brief and all documents
will be served on counsel for the
That the Government will file an answer brief within 30 days of the filing of
Appellant's brief and supporting documents.
No. 04-0698/MC.
No. 04-0723/NA.
No. 04-0749/MC.
No. 04-0750/NA.
No. 04-0754/MC.
Appellant's
motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review out of
time granted up to and including
UNITED STATES COURT OF
APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
No. 05-016
ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW
No. 03-0595/AR.
WHETHER THE ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS ERRED IN UPHOLDING APPELLANT'S
CONVICTION UNDER THE CHILD PORNOGRAPHY PREVENTION ACT, 18 U.S.C. SECTION 2251, ET
SEQ., DESPITE THE SUPREME COURT'S PRONOUNCEMENT THAT THE CPPA DEFINITION
OF CHILD PORNOGRAPHY IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL, ASHCROFT V. FREE SPEECH COALITION,
535 U.S. 234 (2002), AND THIS COURT'S DECISION THAT ASHCROFT V. FREE SPEECH
COALITION REQUIRES PROOF THAT ACTUAL MINORS WERE USED IN PRODUCING THE
PORNOGRAPHIC IMAGES. SEE UNITED STATES V. O'CONNOR, 58 M.J. 450 (C.A.A.F. 2003).
And
the following issues specified by the Court:
I. WHETHER 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(2), WHICH IN PART
PROSCRIBES KNOWING RECEIPT OF CHILD PORNOGRAPHY THAT HAS TRAVELED IN
"FOREIGN COMMERCE," HAS EXTRATERRITORIAL APPLICATION.
II. WHETHER 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(5),
WHICH PROSCRIBES KNOWING POSSESSION OF CHILD PORNOGRAPHY "ON ANY LAND OR
BUILDING OWNED BY, LEASED TO, OR OTHERWISE USED BY OR UNDER THE CONTROL OF THE
III. WHETHER 18 U.S.C. § 2251(a), WHICH IN PART
PROSCRIBES USING A MINOR TO ENGAGE IN SEXUALLY EXPLICIT CONDUCT FOR THE PURPOSE
OF PRODUCING A VISUAL DEPICTION OF THAT CONDUCT USING MATERIAL THAT HAS
TRAVELED IN "FOREIGN COMMERCE," HAS EXTRATERRITORIAL APPLICATION.
IV. WHETHER 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(2) IS BEING APPLIED
DOMESTICALLY OR EXTRATERRITORIALLY WHEN APPLIED TO THE ACT OF DOWNLOADING AND
RECEIVING CHILD PORNOGRAPHY AT A COMPUTER LOCATED IN GERMANY WHEN THAT MATERIAL
WAS "SENT FROM THE U.S. THROUGH THE INTERNET."
V. WHAT EFFECT, IF ANY, IS THERE ON APPELLANT'S
GUILTY PLEA TO RECEIVING CHILD PORNOGRAPHY IN VIOLATION OF 18 U.S.C. §
2252A(a)(2), FROM APPELLANT'S ADMISSION DURING THE PROVIDENCE INQUIRY THAT THE
IMAGES "WERE SENT FROM THE U.S. THROUGH THE INTERNET TO ME."
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No. 02-0955/AR.
No. 05-0059/AR.
No. 05-0060/AR.
No. 05-0061/AR.
No. 05-0062/AR.
No. 05-0063/AR.
No. 05-0064/AF.
No. 05-0065/AF.
No. 05-0066/NA.
__________
*/ Second petition filed in this case.
UNITED STATES COURT OF
APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
No. 05-015
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No. 03-0072/AF.
No. 05-0055/AF.
No. 05-0056/AF.
No. 05-0057/AF.
No. 05-0058/NA.
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No. 02-0623/AR.
I.
WHETHER
18 U.S.C. §§ 2252A(a)(1)-(3) APPLY TO AN INDIVIDUAL WHO SENDS, RECEIVES, AND
REPRODUCES ELECTRONIC FILES CONTAINING CHILD PORNOGRAPHY AT AN INTERNET CAFÉ
LOCATED OFF POST IN GERMANY.
II.
WHETHER
18 U.S.C. §§ 2252A(a)(1)-(3) ARE BEING APPLIED DOMESTICALLY OR
EXTRATERRITORIALLY WHEN E-MAILS CONTAINING CHILD PORNOGRAPHY ARE SENT THROUGH
E-MAIL OR INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDER SERVERS LOCATED IN THE UNITED STATES.
Appellee shall file an answer to the supplemental
brief within thirty days thereafter.
__________
*/ Second petition filed in this case.
UNITED STATES COURT OF
APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
No. 05-014
ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW
No. 04-0524/AR.
WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE PLAINLY ERRED BY
ADMITTING APPELLANT'S CONFESSION BASED ON TESTIMONY DERIVED EXCLUSIVELY FROM
THE CONFESSION ITSELF, WHICH FAILED TO SATISFY THE
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED
No. 04-0614/AR.
No. 04-0664/AR.
No. 04-0691/AR.
No. 04-0692/AR.
No. 04-0693/AR.
No. 04-0696/AR.
No. 04-0714/AR.
No. 04-0716/AR.
No. 04-0736/AR.
No. 04-0759/AR.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No. 05-0052/NA.
No. 05-0053/MC.
No. 05-0054/MC.
MISCELLANEOUS DOCKET – SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS
Misc. No. 05-8005/AR. Ricardo GONZALEZ, Petitioner, v.
MISCELLANEOUS DOCKET - FILINGS
Misc. No. 05-8005/AR. Ricardo GONZALEZ, Petitioner, v.
PETITIONS FOR RECONSIDERATION DENIED
No. 03-0152/NA.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
No. 05-013
HEARINGS
No. 03-0655/MC.
No. 04-0145/AF.
No. 04-0217/AF.
No. 04-0240/AR.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED
No. 04-0623/AF.
No. 04-0635/MC.
No. 04-0656/AF.
No. 04-0658/MC.
No. 04-0674/AF.
No. 04-0687/AF.
No. 04-0704/AF.
No. 04-0743/NA.
No. 04-0744/MC.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No. 05-0049/AR.
No. 05-0050/AF.
No. 05-0051/AF.
MISCELLANEOUS DOCKET - SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS
Misc. No. 05-8003/AR. Donald Moore
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No. 04-0524/AR.
No. 04-0591/NA.
No. 04-0660/AR.
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No. 04-0708/NA.
No. 04-0718/AF.
No. 04-0800/AF.
UNITED STATES COURT OF
APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
No. 05-012
APPEALS - SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS
No. 04-0293/AR.
ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW
No. 04-0293/AR.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED
No. 04-0242/AF.
No. 04-0386/AR.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No. 05-0047/MC.
No. 05-0048/MC.
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No. 04-0711/MC.
It is further ordered that Appellant will file a supplement to the petition for
grant of review on or before
No. 04-0778/AR.
UNITED STATES COURT OF
APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
No. 05-011
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No. 05-0038/NA.
No. 05-0039/AR.
No. 05-0040/AR.
No. 05-0041/AF.
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS this date.]
No. 05-0042/MC.
No. 05-0043/MC.
No. 05-0044/AF.
No. 05-0045/AF.
No. 05-0046/AF.
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No. 05-0041/AF.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
No. 05-010
ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW
No. 04-0313/AF.
I. WHETHER THE CONVENING AUTHORITY ERRED BY ALTERING
THE INCEPTION DATE OF TWO SPECIFICATIONS IN ORDER TO DEFEAT A STATUTE OF
LIMITATIONS CLAIM.
II. WHETHER THE CONVENING AUTHORITY ERRED BY
ATTEMPTING TO REASSESS THE SENTENCE AFTER SETTING ASIDE THREE FINDINGS OF
GUILTY.
III. WHETHER APPELLANT'S CONVICTION FOR INDECENT
ACTS WITH JG MUST BE SET ASIDE WHERE APPELLANT'S ACTIONS WERE NOT DONE WITH THE
"PARTICIPATION" OF JG AND WHERE APPELLANT'S ACTIONS ARE PROTECTED BY
THE FIRST AMENDMENT.
No. 04-0429/AF.
WHETHER THE AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS HAS
MISAPPLIED THIS COURT'S HOLDING IN UNITED STATES v. STRINGFELLOW, 32
M.J. 335 (C.M.A. 1991), IN CASES WHERE AN ACCUSED IS CHARGED WITH KNOWING
INGESTION OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE AND IS SEPARATELY CHARGED WITH THE
SIMULTANEOUS, BUT UNKNOWING, INGESTION OF ANOTHER CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE.
No. 04-0555/AF.
WHETHER PLAIN ERROR OCCURRED UNDER UNITED STATES
v. NEW, 55 M.J. 95 (C.A.A.F. 2001), WHEN THE MILITARY JUDGE, CONTRARY TO
THE DEFENSE REQUEST, SUBMITTED THE QUESTION OF THE LAWFULNESS OF THE DISOBEYED
ORDER TO THE MEMBERS.
No. 04-0563/AF.
WHETHER, IN LIGHT OF UNITED STATES v. WALTERS,
58 M.J. 391 (C.A.A.F. 2003), THE AIR FORCE COURT ERRED IN AFFIRMING APPELLANT'S
CONVICTION FOR WRONGFULLY USING MARIJUANA WHERE THE MEMBERS DID NOT SPECIFY THE
INSTANCE OF USE THAT FORMED THE BASIS OF THEIR FINDING.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No. 03-0394/AF.
No. 05-0034/AR.
No. 05-0035/AF.
No. 05-0036/AF.