YOU ARE HERE: HOME > HEARING CALENDAR > SEPTEMBER 2011 TERM > OCTOBER 2011

 


United States Court of Appeals
for the Armed Forces
450 E Street, Northwest Washington D.C. 20442-0001


Tuesday, October 11, 2011

9:30 a.m.

United States v.

Thomas Schumacher No. 11-0257/MC
(Appellee) (Appellant) (audio)

Counsel for Appellant: Major Kirk Sripinyo, USMC (brief)
Counsel for Appellee:  Lt Ritesh K. Srivastava, JAGC, USN (brief)

Case Summary:  GCM conviction of assault, disobedience of an order, and communicating a threat. Granted issue questions whether the military judge erred in refusing to give a self-defense instruction.

NOTE: Counsel for each side will be allotted 20 minutes to present oral argument in this case.


Followed by:

United States v.

Aaron R. Stanley No. 11-0143/AR
(Appellee) (Appellant) (audio)

Counsel for Appellant: Mary T. Hall, Esq. (brief) (reply brief)
Counsel for Appellee: Capt Benjamin M. Owens-Filice, JA, USA (brief)

Case Summary:  GCM conviction of premeditated murder, possession of marijuana with intent to distribute, distribution and use of methamphetamine, AWOL, failure to obey an order, and adultery. Granted issue questions whether the military judge’s instructions on self-defense were incorrect and incomplete, and if so, whether the lower court erred in concluding that this constituted harmless error.

NOTE: Counsel for each side will be allotted 20 minutes to present oral argument in this case.



Wednesday, October 12, 2011

9:30 a.m.

United States v.

Bobby D. Morrissette No. 11-0282/AR
(Appellee) (Appellant) (audio)

Counsel for Appellant: Capt Barbara A. Snow-Martone, JA, USA (brief)
Counsel for Appellee: Capt Kenneth W. Borgnino, JA, USA (brief)

Case Summary:  GCM conviction of participating in gang initiations, obstructing justice, indecent acts, disobeying an order and use of ecstasy. Granted issue questions whether Appellant’s Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination was violated when he was prosecuted for offenses about which he had provided immunized statements.

NOTE: Counsel for each side will be allotted 20 minutes to present oral argument in this case.


Followed by:

United States v.

Phillip L. Pierce Nos. 11-0239/AR and 11-5004/AR
(Appellee) (Appellant) (audio)

Counsel for Appellant: Capt Kristin McGrory, JA, USA (brief)
Counsel for Appellee:  Capt Frank E. Kostik, JA, USA
(brief)

Case Summary: GCM conviction of attempted indecent acts with a child, attempting to communicate indecent language to a child, and using the internet to attempt to entice a child in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2422.  Granted issue questions whether the Army Court of Criminal Appeals incorrectly found that the military judge’s failure to instruct on necessary elements of an offense was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. The Court specified the issue of whether the Army Court of Criminal Appeals erred as a matter of law when it held that the military judge’s instruction on 18 U.S.C. § 2422 (B), which instruction used the term “Internet” instead of “any facility or means of interstate commerce” was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. The Judge Advocate General also certified the issue of whether the Army Court of Criminal Appeals erred as a matter of law when it held that the military judge’s instruction on 18 U.S.C. § 2422 (B), which instruction used the term “Internet” instead of “any facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce,” was erroneous.

NOTE: Counsel for each side will be allotted 20 minutes to present oral argument in this case.


Followed by:

United States v.

Kenneth L. Goodman No. 11-0389/AR
(Appellee) (Appellant) (audio)

Counsel for Appellant: Lt Col Norman R. Zamboni, JA, USA (brief)
Counsel for Appellee:  Capt Bradley M. Endicott, JA, USA
(brief)

Case Summary: GCM conviction of sexual harassment, maltreatment of subordinates, making a false official statement, wrongful sexual contact, indecent exposure and bigamy. Granted issue questions whether Appellant’s plea of guilty to failure to obey a general regulation (Charge I) was improvident because the military judge failed to secure a disclaimer of the mistake of fact defense when it was raised during the providence inquiry. A specified issue questions whether an Article 134 clause 1 or 2 specification that fails to expressly allege either potential terminal element states an offense under the Supreme Court’s  holdings in United States v. Resendiz-Ponce and Russell v. United States, and this Court’s recent opinions in Medina, Miller, and Jones.

NOTE: Counsel for each side will be allotted 20 minutes to present oral argument in this case. The Court will hear oral argument on the granted issue only.


Monday, October 24, 2011

9:30 a.m.:

United States v.

William J. Kreutzer. Jr., No. 11-0231/AR
(Appellee) (Appellant) (audio)

Counsel for Appellant: Capt Barbara A. Snow-Martone, JA, USA (brief)
Counsel for Appellee:  Capt Chad M. Fisher, JA, USA (brief)

Case Summary: GCM conviction of attempted murder and premeditated murder. Granted issue questions whether the military judge erred when he denied Appellant’s motion seeking Article 13 sentence credit for the government’s 278 day delay in transferring him from death row after the Court of Criminal Appeals set aside the death sentence and affirmed only those non-capital charges to which Appellant pleaded guilty.

NOTE: Counsel for each side will be allotted 20 minutes to present oral argument in this case.


Followed by:

United States v.

Douglas K. Winckelmann No. 11-0280/AR
(Appellee) (Appellant) (audio)

Counsel for Appellant: Mary T. Hall, Esq. (brief)
Counsel for Appellee: Capt Stephen E. Latino, JA, USA (brief)

Case Summary: GCM conviction of possession of child pornography, use of the Internet to entice a minor, indecent language, indecent acts, obstruction of justice and conduct unbecoming of an officer.  Granted issues question: (1) whether the lower court erred in affirming the finding of guilty as to Specification 3 of Charge III when it found that an online chat containing the line “u free tonight” was sufficient to prove attempted enticement (2) whether the Army Court of Criminal Appeals erred by affirming forfeiture of all pay and allowances when the convening authority did not approve any forfeiture and (3) whether an Article 134 clause 1 or 2 specification that fails to expressly allege either potential terminal element states an offense under the Supreme’s Court’s holdings in United States v. Resendiz-Ponce and Russell v. United States, and this Court’s recent opinions in Medina, Miller, and Jones.     

NOTE: Counsel for each side will be allotted 20 minutes to present oral argument in this case.


Tuesday, October 25, 2011

9:30 a.m.:

United States v.

Brent A. Campbell No. 11-0403/AF
(Appellee) (Appellant) (audio)

Counsel for Appellant: Capt Nathan A. White, USAF (brief) (reply brief)
Counsel for Appellee:  Lt Col Linell A. Letendre, USAF
(brief)

Case Summary: GCM conviction of making a false official statement, larceny, and wrongful possession of Vicodin and Percocet. Granted issue questions whether the military judge erred, after finding all three charges arose out of the same transaction and were part of the same impulse, by merging them for sentencing rather than dismissing them.

NOTE: Counsel for each side will be allotted 20 minutes to present oral argument in this case.


Followed by:

United States v.

William J. St. Blanc No. 10-0178/AF
(Appellee) (Appellant) (audio)

Counsel for Appellant: Maj Nicholas W. McCue, USAF (brief)
Counsel for Appellee:  Maj Deanna Daly, USAF (brief)

Case Summary: GCM conviction of attempted indecent language with a child and possession of child pornography. Granted issue questions whether Appellant waived his right to a trial by court members based on the misapprehension of the maximum punishment.

NOTE: Counsel for each side will be allotted 20 minutes to present oral argument in this case.


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.

 

 
United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces • 450 E Street, NW Washington, DC 20442-0001
(202) 761-1448 / DSN 763-1448 • (202) 761-4672 fax