YOU ARE HERE: HOME > HEARING CALENDAR > 2006 TERM > NOVEMBER 2005
United States Court of Appeals
for the Armed Forces
450 E Street, Northwest Washington D.C. 20442-0001
Tuesday, November 1, 2005
9:00 a.m.
United States v.
Stephen P. Gosselin, II No. 05-0255/AF (Appellee) (Appellant) Counsel for Appellant: Capt Christopher S. Morgan, USAF
Counsel for Appellee: Maj Jin-Hwa Lee Frazier, USAFCase Summary: SPCM conviction of using marijuana and psilocybin, distributing marijuana, and introducing psilocybin onto an installation. Granted issue questions whether Appellant’s guilty plea to Specification 4 of the Charge was improvident where, during the providence inquiry, Appellant did not personally admit to aiding or abetting another airman in the commission of the offense charged.
1:00 p.m.
United States v.
Charles J. Wolford No. 04-0578/AR (Appellee) (Appellant) Counsel for Appellant: Capt Todd N. George, JA, USA
Counsel for Appellee: Capt Edward E. Wiggers, JA, USACase Summary: SPCM conviction of mailing, possessing, receiving, and reproducing child pornography for distribution. Granted issues question: (I) whether the Army Court of Criminal Appeals erred in summarily affirming Appellant’s conviction under The Child Pornography Prevention Act (CPPA) 18 U.S.C. § 2251 et seq. (2000) despite the presentation of unconstitutionally overbroad instructions to the panel that, when coupled with the evidence in the record, permitted the panel to convict Appellant on both a constitutional and unconstitutional basis; and (II) whether Appellant’s conviction under the CPPA is not supported by legally sufficient evidence where no evidence was introduced at trial that the depictions were, in fact, produced by using real children as required by United States v. O’Connor, 58 M.J. 450 (C.A.A.F. 2003).
2:00 p.m.:
United States v.
Erick Aleman No. 05-0288/AR (Appellee) (Appellant) Counsel for Appellant: Capt Charles A. Kuhfahl, Jr., JA, USA
Counsel for Appellee: Capt Mark D. McMann, JA, USACase Summary: GCM conviction of conspiracy, willfully suffering the sale of military property, and housebreaking. Granted issue questions whether the military judge erred in accepting Appellant’s plea of guilty to willfully suffering the sale of military property (Specifications 1 and 2 of Charge II) where there was no evidence adduced during the providence inquiry that Appellant had any independent duty to safeguard the military property in question.
NOTE: Counsel for each side will be allowed 15 minutes to present oral argument in this case.
9:00 a.m.:
United States v.
Mark S. Brisbane No. 05-0136/AF (Appellee) (Appellant) Counsel for Appellant: Maj Andrew S. Williams, USAF
Counsel for Appellee: Maj Jin-Hwa Lee Frazier, USAFCase Summary: GCM conviction of indecent acts with a child and possessing child pornography. Granted issues question: (I) whether the military judge erred in failing to suppress Appellant’s statements to the family advocacy provider where those statements were made in response to questions posed without an Article 31, Uniform Code of Military Justice, rights advisement; (II) if so, whether the military judge erred in failing to suppress all evidence derived from Appellant’s statement to the family advocacy provider because AFOSI did not give Appellant a cleansing warning prior to its interrogation of Appellant; and (III) did the prosecution present legally sufficient evidence that Appellant’s possession of visual depictions of nude minors was service-discrediting or prejudicial to good order and discipline.
10:00 a.m.
United States v.
Tracy P. Regan No. 05-0280/AF (Appellee) (Appellant) Counsel for Appellant: Capt Christopher S. Morgan, USAF
Counsel for Appellee: Maj Steven R. Kaufman, USAFRCase Summary: GCM conviction of using and possessing cocaine. Granted issue questions whether Appellant should have been awarded additional confinement credit for noncompliance with R.C.M. 305, pursuant to United States v. Rendon, 58 M.J. 221 (C.A.A.F. 2003).
1:00 p.m.
United States v.
Robert J. Rosenthal No. 05-0244/MC (Appellee) (Appellant) Counsel for Appellant: LT Jason S. Grover, JAGC, USN
Counsel for Appellee: Maj Kevin C. Harris, USMCCase Summary: SPCM conviction of using amphetamine/methamphetamine and marijuana. Granted issue questions whether the lower court erred in finding that Appellant waived his right to submit clemency matters in his second post-trial review process.
2:00 p.m.
United States v.
Thomas A. Crawford No. 05-0266/MC (Appellee) (Appellant) Counsel for Appellant: LT Brian L. Mizer, JAGC, USNR
Counsel for Appellee: Maj Raymond E. Beal, II, USMCCase Summary: GCM conviction of conspiracy, selling military property, larceny, transporting stolen property, and disposing of stolen property. Granted issue questions whether Appellant suffered illegal pretrial confinement in violation of Article 13, Uniform Code of Military Justice, when he was confined at the Base Brig, Marine Corps Base, Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, under conditions more rigorous than those required to ensure his presence at trial between his arrest on 16 October 1997 and his sentencing hearing on 10 June 1998.
NOTE: Counsel for each side will be allowed 15 minutes to present oral argument in this case.
9:00 a.m.
United States v.
Charles M. Lane No. 05-0260/AF (Appellee) (Appellant) Counsel for Appellant: Maj Andrew S. Williams, USAF
Counsel for Appellee: Maj Michelle M. Lindo McCluer, USAFCase Summary: SPCM conviction of using cocaine. Granted issue questions whether a United States senator’s participation on a panel of the Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals violates the Separation of Powers Doctrine.
10:30 a.m.
United States v.
Jessie R. Capers No. 05-0341/NA (Appellee) (Appellant) Counsel for Appellant: LT Stephen C. Reyes, JAGC, USNR
Counsel for Appellee: LT Kathleen A. Helmann, JAGC, USNRCase Summary: GCM conviction of rape. Granted issue questions whether the lower appellate court erred in concluding that defense counsel’s erroneous request to suspend forfeitures and the Staff Judge Advocate’s erroneous advice recommending such action did not prejudice Appellant when he was not entitled to pay.
12:30 p.m.
United States v.
Steven L. Conklin No. 05-0220/AF (Appellee) (Appellant) Counsel for Appellant: Capt Anthony D. Ortiz, USAF
Counsel for Appellee: Maj Matthew Ward, USAFCase Summary: GCM conviction of possessing child pornography. Granted issues question: (I) whether the military judge erred in admitting evidence at trial that was obtained as a direct result of an illegal search of Appellant’s personal computer; and (II) whether the evidence presented by the prosecution at trial was legally insufficient to support Appellant’s conviction for possessing child pornography.
1:30 p.m.
United States v.
Casey D. Roderick No. 05-0195/AF (Appellee) (Appellant) Counsel for Appellant: Capt Christopher S. Morgan, USAF
Counsel for Appellee: Capt Michelle D. Lindo McCluer, USAFCase Summary: GCM conviction of enticing a minor to engage in child pornography, receiving and possessing child pornography, indecent acts with a child, and indecent liberties with a child. Granted issues question: (I) whether Appellant’s admission that his possession of “child pornography” was service discrediting was knowing and voluntary in light of the fact that he was provided an unconstitutionally overbroad definition of “child pornography”; (II) whether the evidence is legally sufficient to sustain Appellant’s conviction for taking indecent liberties with [CMR] and [LNR] and for having them engage in sexually explicit conduct for the purpose of creating a visual depiction of it; and (III) whether Appellant’s conviction for violating 18 U.S.C. § 2251(a) by using a camera shipped in interstate commerce to produce sexually explicit photographs of [CMR], [LNR] and [SKA] should be dismissed in light of his convictions for committing indecent liberties with [CMR], [LNR] and [SKA] for taking the identical photographs.
2:30 p.m.
United States v.
Keith E. Pope No. 05-0077/AF (Appellee) (Appellant) Counsel for Appellant: Capt John N. Page, III, USAF
Counsel for Appellee: Capt Lane A. Thurgood, USAFRCase Summary: GCM conviction of attempting to engage a recruit into an unprofessional relationship, sexual harassment, maltreatment of a subordinate, and simple assault. Granted issues question: (I) whether the evidence was legally sufficient to convict Appellant of Specifications 2, 3, and 4 of Charge I (violation of a directive prohibiting sexual harassment) beyond a reasonable doubt; (II) whether Air Education and Training Instruction 36-2002, Para. 1.1.2.2.5 (prohibiting inappropriate conduct and unprofessional relationships) both facially and as applied to Appellant violates due process and is unconstitutionally void for vagueness; and (III) whether the military judge erred when she admitted, over defense objection, a prosecution exhibit offered as sentencing aggravation evidence that argued Air Force core values and endorsed “harsh adverse action” for those who committed Appellant’s offenses.
| Hearings have been scheduled on the following dates. All scheduled hearings will include case summaries. These hearings will be held in the courtroom located on the second floor of the Courthouse, 450 E Street, Northwest, Washington, D.C. 20442-0001, unless otherwise noted. Audio recordings of hearings normally will be available on this page the day following the hearing.
|
(202) 761-1448 / DSN 763-1448 • (202) 761-4672 fax