YOUR BROWSER'S FIND FUNCTION CAN BE USED TO LOCATE A SPECIFIC DATE, NAME, DOCKET NUMBER, OR TYPE OF ACTIONS.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
NO. 98-208
AUGUST 3, 1998

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

No. 98-0955/AR. U.S. v. Larry F. BRIDGES. CCA 9701973.

No. 98-0956/AR. U.S. v. Michael D. RICKEY. CCA 9501597.

No. 98-0957/AR. U.S. v. Gregory S. WILLIS. CCA 9500730.

No. 98-0958/MC. U.S. v. Richard L. GAFFORD. CCA 97-1385.

No. 98-0959/NA. U.S. v. Michael A. STARLING. CCA 98-0276.

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

No. 96-0126/NA. U.S. v. Glen P. EDWARDS. CCA 94-0085. Appellee’s motion to attach granted.

No. 98-0232/AR. U.S. v. Kurt M. BERTIE. CCA 9600846. Appellant’s second motion to extend time to file final brief granted to September 13, 1998.

No. 98-0497/NA. U.S. v. Charles W. DAVIS. CCA 96-0585. Appellant’s fourth motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted to August 12, 1998.

No. 98-0681/NA. U.S. v. Tyrone L. WELLS. CCA 96-1349. Appellee’s motion to extend time to file answer to supplement to petition for grant of review granted to September 11, 1998.

No. 98-0836/NA. U.S. v. Robert C. CHIVERS. CCA 97-0849. Motion filed by Lieutenant Jeffrey K. Van Nest to withdraw as appellate counsel granted.

No. 98-0840/AF. U.S. v. William C. MILLER, Jr. CCA 32720. Appellant’s motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted to August 31, 1998.


UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
NO. 98-209
AUGUST 4, 1998

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

No. 98-0960/AR. U.S. v. Erwin L. FOLEY. CCA 9701857.

No. 98-0961/AR. U.S. v. Wesley J. VINSON. CCA 9601956.

No. 98-0962/NA. U.S. v. Courtrenay E. CROSS. CCA 96-1023.

No. 98-0963/NA. U.S. v. Benjamin H. HOGG. CCA 9700493.

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

No. 98-0306/MC. U.S. v. Kenneth R. WATT. On further consideration of the above-entitled case, the Hearing Notice issued on the 21st day of July, 1998, is hereby vacated.

No. 98-0859/AF. U.S. v. Guillermo GARZA. CCA 33028.

No. 98-0860/AF. U.S. v. Carl W. GONZALEZ. CCA 32832.

    In each of the above two cases, appellant’s motion to file petition for grant of review out of time granted; appellant will file supplement to petition for grant of review on or before September 4, 1998.


UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
NO. 98-210
AUGUST 5, 1998

APPEALS - SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS

No. 97-0680/AF. U.S. v. Pedro M. DELACRUZ. CCA 32203. On consideration of the specified issue (48 MJ 20), we conclude that the facts related to the specified issue are not as we believed them to be when the issue was granted review. On consideration of the granted issue, we note that appellant was held beyond the expiration of his active service solely for the purposes of court-martial. As such, his entitlement to pay and allowances ceased the day he began serving the sentence to confinement from this court-martial, and there was no pay or allowances to be forfeited under Article 58b, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 USC § 858b. See 39 CompGen 42. Therefore, our decision in United States v. Gorski, 47 MJ 370 (1997), is inapplicable as to forfeitures. However, appellant was a staff sergeant (pay grade E-5) at the time of trial. Therefore, any reduction effected under Article 57(a), UCMJ, 10 USC § 857(a), was without legal effect. See United States v. Gorski, supra. Accordingly, it is ordered that the specified issue is dismissed as improvidently granted; and that the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed as to result only. Execution of the reduction in grade prior to the date of the action of the convening authority is hereby declared to be without legal effect. The record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Air Force for appropriate action.

    SULLIVAN, Judge (concurring in part and dissenting in part):

    See United States v. Keeney, No. 97-0596, __ MJ __ (Daily Journal April 15, 1998) (Sullivan, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part).

    Senior Judge Everett did not participate.

    Judge Effron did not participate in this decision. See United States v. Gorski, No. 97-0034, MJ (Daily Journal September 8, 1997). This is without prejudice to his future participation in this case should it subsequently be presented to this Court in a manner that does not require determination of the application of the Ex Post Facto Clause of the United States Constitution to the amendments to Title 10, United States Code, made by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996, Pub.L.No. 104-106, 110 Stat. 462-63 (1996).

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW - OTHER SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS

No. 98-0035/AF. U.S. v. Trevoi L. CRUMP. CCA S29315. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals in the above entitled case, in light of United States v. Gorski, 47 MJ 370 (1997), it is ordered that the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals is set aside. The record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Air Force for remand to that court for consideration of whether the amendment to Article 57(a), Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 USC § 857(a), and the addition of Article 58b, UCMJ, 10 USC § 858b, made by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996, Pub.L.No. 104-106, 110 Stat. 462-63 (1996), affect the sentence in this case. Following these proceedings, Article 67(a), UCMJ, 10 USC § 867(a)(1994), will apply.

    SULLIVAN, Judge (concurring):

    I concur. See my separate opinion in United States v. Gorski, 47 MJ 370, 376 (1997).

    Judge Effron did not participate in this decision. See United States v. Gorski, No. 97-0034, MJ (Daily Journal September 8, 1997). This is without prejudice to his future participation in this case should it subsequently be presented to this Court in a manner that does not require determination of the application of the Ex Post Facto Clause of the United States Constitution to the amendments to Title 10, United States Code, made by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996, Pub.L.No. 104-106, 110 Stat. 462-63 (1996).

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

No. 98-0157/AF. U.S. v. Ronald J. RIDDICK. CCA 32652.*/

No. 98-0197/AF. U.S. v. Sarah L. HELGERSON. CCA 32575.*/

No. 98-0964/NA. U.S. v. Robert M. BECKER. CCA 97-1623.

No. 98-0965/AF. U.S. v. Brian H. GRONDIN. CCA 32902.

No. 98-0966/AF. U.S. v. TJ V. PEARSON, Jr. CCA 33118.

No. 98-0967/AF. U.S. v. Brian K. WALTON. CCA 33072.

No. 98-0968/AF. U.S. v. Joseph R. WOOD. CCA S29516.

No. 98-0969/AR. U.S. v. Stephanie L. BELL. CCA 9700225.

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

No. 98-0160/NA. U.S. v. Antonio D. SCHULER. CCA 96-1316. On further consideration of the above-entitled case, the Hearing Notice issued on the 24th day of July, 1998, is hereby vacated.

No. 98-0200/NA. U.S. v. Joey VILLAREAL. CCA 96-1234. To September 9, 1998.

No. 98-0522/MC. U.S. v. Christopher L. HOWARD. CCA 97-0424. To September 17, 1998.

In each of the above two cases, appellant’s motion to extend time to file final brief granted to the date indicated.
__________

*/ Second petition filed in same case.


UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
NO. 98-211
AUGUST 6, 1998

APPEALS - SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS

No. 97-0463/AF. U.S. v. Cedric R. BAKER. CCA 31880. On consideration of the above-styled case in light of United States v. Scheffer, 523 U.S. ____, 118 S.Ct. 1261 (1998), it is ordered that the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed.

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

No. 98-0970/AR. U.S. v. Juan PENA. CCA 9702037.

No. 98-0971/AR. U.S. v. Moses LOVER, Jr. CCA 9500726.

No. 98-0972/MC. U.S. v. Charles CHATMAN. CCA 97-0129.

No. 98-0973/NA. U.S. v. Joseph P. RYAN. CCA 98-0167.

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

No. 97-1164/CG. U.S. v. Orison S. ACEVEDO. CCA 1066.

No. 98-0034/CG. U.S. v. Scott L. GILBERT. CCA 1067.

    In each of the above two cases, appellee’s third motion to extend time to file answer to final brief granted to September 8, 1998.

No. 98-0846/AR. U.S. v. Juan W. BUCK. CCA 9600177. Appellant’s motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted to September 8, 1998.


UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
NO. 98-212
AUGUST 7, 1998

CERTIFICATES FOR REVIEW FILED

No. 98-5032/NA. United States, appellant, v. Robert L. FINSTER, appellee. CCA 97-1882. The Judge Advocate General, United States Navy, requests that action be taken with respect to the following issue:

Whether the Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals erred when it relied upon its earlier decision in United States v. Cunningham, 44 MJ 758 (N.M.Ct.Crim.App. 1996) in finding that plain error can exist without a showing of prejudice by the appellant.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

No. 96-0875/AF. U.S. v. Victoria A. CATALANI. CCA S29021.*/

No. 98-0098/AF. U.S. v. Martha A. LAWSON. CCA 32303.*/

No. 98-0220/AF. U.S. v. Eric A. RENAUD. CCA 32811.*/

No. 98-0974/AR. U.S. v. Michael L. RODGERS. CCA 9800292.

No. 98-0975/MC. U.S. v. Wesley S. GRIMM. CCA 97-1691.

No. 98-0976/AF. U.S. v. Darrell L. BRADSHAW. CCA S29467.

No. 98-0977/AF. U.S. v. David T. HARRIS. CCA 32958.

No. 98-0978/AF. U.S. v. Chadwyck G. JOHNSON. CCA 32996.

No. 98-0979/AF. U.S. v. Terry R. JOUETT. CCA 32618.

No. 98-0980/AF. U.S. v. Eric L. TRAVIESO. CCA S29511.

No. 98-0981/AF. U.S. v. Shan L. WILLIAMS. CCA S29360.

No. 98-0982/AF. U.S. v. Shawn C. ZUK. CCA 32872.

MISCELLANEOUS DOCKET - FILINGS

Misc. No. 98-8021/CG. DeMauri M. FRAZIER, appellant, v. UNITED STATES, appellee. CCA 001-98. Writ-appeal petition for review of the United States Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals denial of petition for extraordinary relief, brief and appellant’s motion to attach documents filed under Rule 27(b). Appellee will file answer on or before 17th day of August, 1998.

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

No. 98-0498/MC. U.S. v. Rae J. FOX. CCA 96-0361. To September 17, 1998.

No. 98-0512/MC. U.S. v. John E. PILKINGTON. CCA 96-2393. To September 29, 1998.

    In each of the above two cases, appellant’s motion to extend time to file final brief granted to the date indicated.
__________

*/ Second petition filed in same case.


UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
NO. 98-213
AUGUST 10, 1998

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

No. 98-0983/AR. U.S. v. Jeffery D.L. COTTRELL. CCA 9601600.

No. 98-0984/AR. U.S. v. Eric M. FRAZER. CCA 9701707.

No. 98-0985/AR. U.S. v. Michael A. MARQUEZ. CCA 9800241.

No. 98-0986/AR. U.S. v. Mark W. PRATT. CCA 9700823.

No. 98-0987/AR. U.S. v. Charlie SCOTT. CCA 9502201.

No. 98-0988/AF. U.S. v. Motara L. BROWN. CCA S29485.

No. 98-0989/AF. U.S. v. Adam C. BURR. CCA S29556.

No. 98-0990/AF. U.S. v. Seth D. LEWIS. CCA 32965.

No. 98-0991/AF. U.S. v. Tony A. ROBERTS. CCA S29499.

No. 98-0992/NA. U.S. v. Eugene A. DOGANS. CCA 96-1525.

No. 98-0993/MC. U.S. v. David RANGEL, Jr. CCA 98-0560.


UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
NO. 98-214
AUGUST 11, 1998

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED

No. 98-0343/MC. U.S. v. Richard R. HERNANDEZ. CCA 97-0627.

No. 98-0371/AR. U.S. v. Vincent A. YOUNG. CCA 9501501.

No. 98-0532/AR. U.S. v. Keith MORRISON. CCA 9502092.

    Judge Effron did not participate in this decision. See United States v. Gorski, 47 MJ 370 (1997). This is without prejudice to his future participation in this case should it subsequently be presented to the Court in a manner that does not require determination of the application of the Ex Post Facto Clause to the amendments to Title 10, United States Code, made by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996, Pub.L.No. 104-106, 110 Stat. 462-63 (1996).

No. 98-0603/MC. U.S. v. Ferrill E. CHATMAN. CCA 96-1513.

No. 98-0684/AF. U.S. v. Michele S. BROWN. CCA 32959.

No. 98-0703/NA. U.S. v. Cassidy K. MALLON. CCA 97-2199.

No. 98-0730/NA. U.S. v. Timothy W. KUYKENDALL. CCA 94-1434.

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

No. 98-0994/AR. U.S. v. Merrill R. CORMIER. CCA 9800135.

No. 98-0995/AR. U.S. v. Calvin E. DANIELS. CCA 9700664.

No. 98-0996/MC. U.S. v. Woodrow K. BROWN. CCA 97-1596.

No. 98-0997/NA. U.S. v. Richard J. OLSAK-FINN. CCA 97-2030.

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

No. 97-1137/AF. U.S. v. Dudley S. ANDERSON. CCA 31996. Appellant’s motion to extend time to file final brief granted to August 17, 1998.

No. 98-0078/AR. U.S. v. Ervin M. GRAVES. CCA 9401271. Appellant’s fourth motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted to August 20, 1998.

No. 98-0146/AF. U.S. v. Leslie D. RILEY. CCA 32183. To September 11, 1998.

No. 98-0270/AR. U.S. v. Charles F. ROTH. CCA 9600441. To September 21, 1998.

    In each of the above two cases, appellee’s motion to extend time to file answer to final brief granted to the date indicated.

No. 98-0679/AR. U.S. v. Carlos V. DIAZ-DUPREY. CCA 9600181.
Appellant’s third motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted to August 19, 1998.

No. 98-0769/MC. U.S. v. Terrance L. SPANN. CCA 96-1420. Appellee’s motion to extend time to file answer to supplement to petition for grant of review granted to September 11, 1998.

No. 98-0823/AR. U.S. v. Brian K. HETHERINGTON. CCA 9701337. Appellant’s second motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted to September 27, 1998.

No. 98-0861/AF. U.S. v. Damon R. HICKS. CCA S29354. To September 4, 1998.

No. 98-0884/MC. U.S. v. Shawn L. WILLIAMS. CCA 98-0085. To September 11, 1998.

    In each of the above two cases, appellant’s motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted to the date indicated.


UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
NO. 98-215
AUGUST 12, 1998

APPEALS - SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS

No. 97-0750/AF. U.S. v. Mark T. HEIGHT. CCA 32323. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals, the petition is granted and the decision is affirmed. [See also ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW this date.]

No. 98-0007/NA. U.S. v. James T. BENTZ. CCA 96-1222. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals we hold that appellant’s plea to specification 24 of Charge I was not providently received as the military judge conducted no specific inquiry into that specification. Accordingly, the petition is granted; the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals as to specification 24 of Charge I is reversed; the finding of guilty thereof is set aside and that specification is dismissed; and in all other respects the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed. [See also ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW this date.]

ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW

No. 97-0750/AF. U.S. v. Mark T. HEIGHT. CCA 32323. [See also APPEALS - SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS this date.]

No. 98-0007/NA. U.S. v. James T. BENTZ. CCA 96-1222. [See also APPEALS - SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS this date.]

No. 98-0477/AR. U.S. v. Frank R. REED, Jr. CCA 9601782. Review granted on the following issue raised by appellate defense counsel:

WHETHER THE STAFF JUDGE ADVOCATE'S POST-TRIAL RECOMMENDATION CONTAINED NUMEROUS LEGAL ERRORS AND OMISSIONS CONCERNING THE FINDINGS, THE MAXIMUM PENALTY BASED ON THE FINDINGS, AND APPELLANT'S RANK. and the following issue specified by the Court: WHETHER FAILURE OF DEFENSE COUNSEL TO CORRECT THE ERRORS IN THE STAFF JUDGE ADVOCATE'S POST-TRIAL RECOMMENDATION CONSTITUTED INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL. No. 98-0646/AR. U.S. v. John A. WEISBECK. CCA 9502215. Review granted on the following issue: WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE ERRED IN LIMITING APPELLANT'S CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO PRESENT A DEFENSE BY DENYING A CONTINUANCE TO PROVIDE, AT NO COST TO THE GOVERNMENT, FOR THE APPEARANCE OF AN EXPERT WITNESS AND, ADDITIONALLY, TO ENABLE THAT EXPERT TO ASSIST IN THE PREPARATION OF THE DEFENSE CASE.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

No. 98-0998/AR. U.S. v. Jose M. MARTINEZ. CCA 9501957.

No. 98-0999/AR. U.S. v. Roger D. EVERSOLE. CCA 9600466.

No. 98-1000/NA. U.S. v. Tony T. BABINSKI. CCA 97-1998.

No. 98-1001/MC. U.S. v. David W. MAGNAN. CCA 97-2071.

No. 98-1002/MC. U.S. v. Kevin BIRGE. CCA 97-0430.

No. 98-1003/MC. U.S. v. Lawrence A. SMITH. CCA 97-0309.

No. 98-1004/MC. U.S. v. Anthony R. BURGESS. CCA 96-2518.

No. 98-1005/MC. U.S. v. Phillip D. HINTON. CCA 95-1115.

No. 98-1006/AF. U.S. v. Stefan M. ANDRASI. CCA 32654.

No. 98-1007/AF. U.S. v. Grahm B. CLEGG. CCA S29548.

No. 98-1008/AF. U.S. v. Eric J. FULTON. CCA S29478.


UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
NO. 98-216
AUGUST 13, 1998

ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW

No. 97-0935/MC. U.S. v. Johnathan W. MITCHELL. CCA 95-2031. Review granted on the following issue:

WHETHER REVOCATION OF APPELLANT'S SUSPENDED CONFINEMENT FOR FAILURE TO MAKE FULL RESTITUTION WITHIN A YEAR OF THE ANNOUNCEMENT OF FINDINGS WAS LAWFUL ABSENT EVIDENCE AND FINDINGS THAT HE WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE FAILURE.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
NO. 98-217
AUGUST 14, 1998

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

No. 98-1009/NA. U.S. v. Arnold L. DURHAM. CCA 97-2172.

No. 98-1010/AR. U.S. v. Pedro GORDON. CCA 9800255.

No. 98-1011/AR. U.S. v. James A. WEATHERALL. CCA 9601170.

No. 98-1012/AR. U.S. v. Marcius J. JONES. CCA 9601952.

No. 98-1013/AR. U.S. v. Stephen F. MESSNER. CCA 9600694.

No. 98-1014/AR. U.S. v. James A. WEATHERALL. CCA 9601983.

MISCELLANEOUS DOCKET - SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS

Misc. No. 98-8018/NA. Oscar W. WALKER, appellant, v. Captain C.A. SWAN, et al., appellees. Writ-appeal petition for review of denial of petition for extraordinary relief denied; appellee’s motion to file answer out of time granted.

Misc. No. 98-8020/NA. United States, appellee, v. Todd R. FORBES, appellant. CCA 98-00782. Writ-appeal petition for review of denial of petition for extraordinary relief denied without prejudice to appellant’s right to assert the matter raised in the writ appeal petition during the course of normal appellate review; appellant’s motion to stay proceedings denied as moot.

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

No. 97-0242/AR. U.S. v. Thomas HAVERS, II. CCA 9500015. Appellant’s motions for leave to file and to admit defense appellate exhibit A denied.

No. 98-0174/AF. U.S. v. Albert M. BROUILLETTE. CCA 32527. Appellant’s motion to submit document denied.

No. 98-0434/MC. U.S. v. Kasie L. DAWSON. CCA 96-2394. Appellant’s motion to attach affidavit denied.

    SULLIVAN, Judge (dissenting): I would grant the motion.

No. 98-0708/MC. U.S. v. Alexander J. LOGAN. CCA 97-2098. Appellant’s motion to attach documents granted.

No. 98-0820/MC. U.S. v. Samuel M. JONES. CCA 97-2140. Appellant’s motion to attach denied.


UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
NO. 98-218
AUGUST 17, 1998

APPEALS - SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS

No. 98-0573/MC. U.S. v. Tony M. MASON. CCA 96-1793. The petition for grant of review is granted and the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed. [See also ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW this date.]

ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW

No. 98-0489/NA. U.S. v. Anthony R. SHERMAN. CCA 96-0840. Review granted on the following issues:

I. WHETHER APPELLANT'S PRETRIAL AGREEMENT VIOLATED PUBLIC POLICY BECAUSE IT CONTAINED AN ILLEGAL, SUB ROSA TERM THAT REQUIRED APPELLANT TO WAIVE MOTIONS OF UNLAWFUL COMMAND INFLUENCE AND ILLEGAL PRETRIAL CONFINEMENT.

II. WHETHER THE LOWER COURT EXCEEDED ITS FACTFINDING POWERS UNDER ARTICLE 66(C), UCMJ, BY RESOLVING A MATERIAL FACTUAL DISPUTE WITHOUT ORDERING AN EVIDENTIARY HEARING.

No. 98-0573/MC. U.S. v. Tony M. MASON. CCA 96-1793. [See also APPEALS - SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS this date.]

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED

No. 98-0660/NA. U.S. v. Barry W. NOVINSKA. CCA 97-0119.

No. 98-0662/MC. U.S. v. Jose G. VERDEJO. CCA 96-2162.

No. 98-0683/NA. U.S. v. Stephen D. DURANT. CCA 96-1694.

No. 98-0710/AF. U.S. v. Brian L. SIEBE. CCA S29160.

No. 98-0740/MC. U.S. v. Jason P. ALDERSON. CCA 96-1449.

No. 98-0762/MC. U.S. v. James F. NALL, III. CCA 97-1926.

No. 98-0765/MC. U.S. v. Kevin S. LEE. CCA 96-1851.

No. 98-0781/NA. U.S. v. Benjamin T. SELF. CCA 98-0191.

No. 98-0789/AR. U.S. v. Eric M. CAROZZA. CCA 9701609.

No. 98-0792/AF. U.S. v. Eric L. CONGROVE. CCA 33074.

No. 98-0796/AF. U.S. v. Dante R. RHYNE. CCA 33044.

No. 98-0797/AF. U.S. v. Kristopher L. RIVERA. CCA 32980.

No. 98-0798/AF. U.S. v. Kenneth J. ROBINSON. CCA 33013.

No. 98-0803/NA. U.S. v. Loren D. DRAKE. CCA 98-0064.

No. 98-0804/AR. U.S. v. Raymond J. BOVE. CCA 9701115.

No. 98-0805/MC. U.S. v. Wade A. REIDT. CCA 97-0614.

No. 98-0806/AF. U.S. v. Christopher L. CLAWSON. CCA 33020.

No. 98-0808/AF. U.S. v. Mary J. PATTERSON. CCA S29495.

No. 98-0809/AF. U.S. v. John C. ZARTMAN. CCA 33024.

No. 98-0814/AF. U.S. v. Christopher W. MCFARLAND. CCA S29494.

No. 98-0815/AF. U.S. v. Felix A. OTERO, III. CCA 33128.

No. 98-0816/AF. U.S. v. Deloyd M. EBERT. CCA 33086.

No. 98-0817/AF. U.S. v. Mark J. FOLEY. CCA 32908.

No. 98-0818/AF. U.S. v. Daniel K. SKINNER. CCA 33004.

No. 98-0819/AF. U.S. v. Elizabeth D. TURNER. CCA S29487.

No. 98-0830/AF. U.S. v. Ashley J. BROCK-DUPONT. CCA 32986.

No. 98-0831/AF. U.S. v. Robert A. JOHNSON. CCA 33001.

No. 98-0832/AF. U.S. v. Kenyetta N. LOVINGS. CCA 33019.

No. 98-0839/AF. U.S. v. David B. GIVANS. CCA 32995.

No. 98-0841/AF. U.S. v. Todd E. PAYNE. CCA S29504.

No. 98-0863/NA. U.S. v. Wilmor F. ORDILLAS. CCA 97-1195.

No. 98-0894/AF. U.S. v. Daniel C. CASTRO. CCA S29505.

No. 98-0903/AF. U.S. v. Catherine L. OVERHOLT. CCA 32737.

No. 98-0909/AR. U.S. v. Tamaaiga F. SAGIAO. CCA 9701648.

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

No. 98-1015/MC. U.S. v. Joseph B. ALLOWAY. CCA 97-2093.

No. 98-1016/NA. U.S. v. Adam L. CARR. CCA 98-0038.

No. 98-1017/NA. U.S. v. Anthony L. HOWARD. CCA 97-0392.

No. 98-1018/AR. U.S. v. Robert C. WAID. CCA 9700551.

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

No. 98-0078/AR. U.S. v. Ervin M. GRAVES. CCA 9401271. Appellant’s motion to correct errata granted.

No. 98-0335/NA. U.S. v. Julian W. LEWIS, Jr. CCA 96-0807. Appellant’s motion to extend time to file final brief granted but only to September 29, 1998.

No. 98-0658/NA. U.S. v. Darrell J. MUIRHEAD. CCA 96-1211. Appellee’s motion to extend time to file answer to supplement to petition for grant of review granted to August 21, 1998.

No. 98-0783/NA. U.S. v. Michael W. FRICKE. CCA 96-1293. To September 14, 1998.

No. 98-0811/AR. U.S. v. Ezell MCCALPINE, Jr. CCA 9701508. To September 21, 1998.

    In each of the above two cases, appellant’s second motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted to the date indicated.

No. 98-0874/AF. U.S. v. Gary D. CUNDIFF. CCA 32817.

No. 98-0882/AR. U.S. v. Jeremy J. WILLIAMS. CCA 9601126.

    In each of the above two cases, appellant’s motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted to September 11, 1998.

No. 98-0960/AR. U.S. v. Erwin L. FOLEY. CCA 9701857. Appellant’s motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted to October 3, 1998.

No. 98-8021/CG. U.S. v. DeMauri M. FRAZIER. CCA 001-98. Appellee’s motion to extend time to file answer to writ appeal granted to August 21, 1998.


UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
NO. 98-219
AUGUST 18, 1998

ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW

No. 98-0569/MC. U.S. v. Alan L. NOBLE. CCA 95-0215. Review granted on the following issue:

WHETHER THE NAVY-MARINE CORPS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS ERRED BY CONSIDERING ALLEGED OFFENSES OF WHICH APPELLANT WAS ACQUITTED AS "GOOD AND COGENT REASONS" FOR APPELLANT'S RECEIPT OF CONFINEMENT AND A BAD-CONDUCT DISCHARGE, WHERE APPELLANT'S CO-ACTORS WERE NEVER CHARGED OR PUNISHED.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED

No. 98-0585/AR. U.S. v. Forrest D. LANCHBURY. CCA 9601577.

No. 98-0800/NA. U.S. v. Kevin L. JETT. CCA 97-1840.

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

No. 98-1019/AR. U.S. v. Cinquetta F. BROWN-SIMPKINS. CCA 9601938.

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

No. 98-0306/MC. U.S. v. Kenneth R. WATT. CCA 96-1587. Appellant’s motion to file brief out of time granted.

No. 98-0497/NA. U.S. v. Charles W. DAVIS. CCA 96-0585. Appellant’s fifth motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted.


UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
NO. 98-220
AUGUST 19, 1998

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

No. 98-1020/NA. U.S. v. Russell A. NENSTEIL. CCA 97-1788.

No. 98-1021/MC. U.S. v. Robert C. MARINE. CCA 96-2491.

No. 98-1022/AR. U.S. v. Mark J. MAYO. CCA 9700501.

No. 98-1023/AR. U.S. v. Keith HENRY. CCA 9402015.

No. 98-1024/AR. U.S. v. Alan C. BENZO. CCA 9601997.

No. 98-1025/AF. U.S. v. Kevin J. JOHNSON. CCA S29536.

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

No. 98-0657/AR. U.S. v. Brian D. ROBERSON. CCA 9600765. Appellant’s motion to admit defense appellate exhibits B-H granted.

    Judge Effron did not participate in this action. See United States v. Gorski, No. 97-0034, MJ (Daily Journal September 8, 1997). This is without prejudice to his future participation in this case should it subsequently be presented to this Court in a manner that does not require determination of the application of the Ex Post Facto Clause of the United States Constitution to the amendments to Title 10, United States Code, made by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996, Pub.L.No. 104-106, 110 Stat. 462-63 (1996).


UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
NO. 98-221
AUGUST 20, 1998

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

No. 98-1026/NA. U.S. v. Michael P. JACKSON. CCA 97-1638.

No. 98-1027/NA. U.S. v. Robert L. SAUNDERS. CCA 98-0018.

PETITIONS FOR RECONSIDERATION DENIED

No. 97-1121/AF. U.S. v. Edmund E. CARTER. CCA S29336. On consideration of the Request for Reconsideration of the order dated April 16, 1998, in the above-entitled case, we note that appellant was convicted of making a false official statement on October 2, 1996, as well as three other offenses committed before April 1, 1996. We held in United States v. Gorski, 47 MJ 370 (1997), that the provisions of Articles 57(a)(1) and 58b, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 USC §§ 857(a)(1) and 858b, respectively, could not be applied to offenses committed before April 1, 1996, the effective date of those provisions. Appellant was sentenced to a bad-conduct discharge, confinement for 3 months, and reduction to E-1. Thus, Article 58b subjects him to automatic forfeiture of 2/3s pay per month for 3 months and Article 57(a)(1) makes the automatic forfeiture and the reduction effective 14 days after sentence. In the order dated April 16, 1998, we held that the existence of an offense committed after the effective date rendered the Gorski rule inapplicable. We adhere to that holding.

The court-martial system imposes a single sentence for all offenses before the court. This unitary sentencing scheme is a valid exercise of congressional power. Jackson v. Taylor, 353 U.S. 569, 574 (1957). Gorski permits Article 58b to be effective in the unitary sentencing scheme where the maximum sentence for any or all offense(s) committed on or after the effective date of that provision includes a punitive discharge and confinement for the term imposed. Unitary sentencing is analogous to the continuing-offense doctrine. Thus, in the ex post facto context, unitary sentencing "operates solely with respect to subsequent conduct. ‘If the conduct . . . continues after the enactment or amendment of the statute in question, this statute may be applied without violating the ex post facto prohibition.’" Wright v. Superior Court, 936 P.2d 101, 107 (Cal. 1997), quoting 1 LaFave & Scott, Substantive Criminal Law § 2.4 at 142 (1986). Therefore, Wright is persuasive authority, as is United States v. Garfinkel, 29 F.3d 1253, 1259 (8th Cir. 1994), and United States v. Brady, 26 F.3d 282, 291 (2d Cir. 1994).

The maximum punishment in this special court-martial for making a false official statement includes a bad-conduct discharge, confinement for 6 months, and 2/3s monthly forfeitures for 6 months. See para. 31e, Part IV, Manual for Courts-Martial, United States (1995 ed.), and Article 19, UCMJ, 10 USC § 819.

This offense also carries a reduction to E-1. See RCM 1003(b)(5), Manual, supra. Because the maximum punishment for the post-effective-date offense is at least as great as the sentence imposed, it supports the automatic forfeiture for the period of confinement (3 months) as well as application of Article 57(a)(1). Thus, the Gorski rule does not apply. Accordingly, the Request for Reconsideration is denied.

    SULLIVAN, Judge (dissenting):

    I dissent. See my separate opinions in United States v. Roseboro, No. 98-0439, __ MJ __ (Daily Journal July 27, 1998), and United States v. Gorski, 47 MJ 370, 376 (1997).

    Senior Judge Everett did not participate.

    Judge Effron did not participate in this decision. See United States v. Gorski, No. 97-0034, MJ (Daily Journal September 8, 1997). This is without prejudice to his future participation in this case should it subsequently be presented to this Court in a manner that does not require determination of the application of the Ex Post Facto Clause of the United States Constitution to the amendments to Title 10, United States Code, made by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996, Pub.L.No. 104-106, 110 Stat. 462-63 (1996).

No. 97-0580/AF. U.S. v. Matthew J. SLAYMAKER. CCA S29250.

No. 97-0639/AF. U.S. v. Eric C. MARTIN. CCA S29241.

No. 97-0744/AF. U.S. v. Patrick J. FANNING. CCA S29278.

No. 97-0851/AF. U.S. v. Alfred B. HESTER, Jr. CCA 32364.

No. 97-0853/AF. U.S. v. Charles W. THOMPSON. CCA 32431.

No. 97-0979/AF. U.S. v. Chad W. FERCHO. CCA 32514.

    In each of the above six cases, the Request for Reconsideration of the Order dated April 20, 1998, in the above-entitled cases in light of United States v. Carter, No. 97-1121, __ MJ __ (Daily Journal August 20, 1998), is denied.

    SULLIVAN, Judge (dissenting):

    I dissent. See my separate opinions in United States v. Roseboro, No. 98-0439, __ MJ __ (Daily Journal July 27, 1998), and United States v. Gorski, 47 MJ 370, 376 (1997).

    Senior Judge Everett did not participate.

    Judge Effron did not participate in these decisions. See United States v. Gorski, No. 97-0034, MJ (Daily Journal September 8, 1997). This is without prejudice to his future participation in these cases should they subsequently be presented to this Court in a manner that does not require determination of the application of the Ex Post Facto Clause of the United States Constitution to the amendments to Title 10, United States Code, made by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996, Pub.L.No. 104-106, 110 Stat. 462-63 (1996).

No. 97-1096/AF. U.S. v. Ray T. BISHOP, III. CCA 32472.

No. 97-1104/AF. U.S. v. Devin L. LONG. CCA 32476.

No. 97-1123/AF. U.S. v. Stacey M. LINN. CCA 32474.

No. 97-1152/AF. U.S. v. Thomas J. CORDA. CCA 32712.

No. 97-1186/AF. U.S. v. Eric L. PARSONS. CCA S29340.

    In each of the above five cases, the Request for Reconsideration of the Order dated April 21, 1998, in the above-entitled cases in light of United States v. Carter, No. 97-1121, __ MJ __ (Daily Journal August 20, 1998), is denied.

    SULLIVAN, Judge (dissenting):

    I dissent. See my separate opinions in United States v. Roseboro, No. 98-0439, __ MJ __ (Daily Journal July 27, 1998), and United States v. Gorski, 47 MJ 370, 376 (1997).

    Senior Judge Everett did not participate.

    Judge Effron did not participate in these decisions. See United States v. Gorski, No. 97-0034, MJ (Daily Journal September 8, 1997). This is without prejudice to his future participation in these cases should they subsequently be presented to this Court in a manner that does not require determination of the application of the Ex Post Facto Clause of the United States Constitution to the amendments to Title 10, United States Code, made by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996, Pub.L.No. 104-106, 110 Stat. 462-63 (1996).

No. 97-1140/AF. U.S. v. Robert J. OVERSTREET. CCA 32353. On consideration of the Request for Reconsideration of the Order dated April 21, 1998, in the above-entitled case, we conclude that the only offenses in this case are continuing offenses. Accordingly, the Request for Reconsideration is denied.

    Senior Judge Everett did not participate.

    Judge Effron did not participate in this decision. See United States v. Gorski, No. 97-0034, MJ (Daily Journal September 8, 1997). This is without prejudice to his future participation in this case should it subsequently be presented to this Court in a manner that does not require determination of the application of the Ex Post Facto Clause of the United States Constitution to the amendments to Title 10, United States Code, made by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996, Pub.L.No. 104-106, 110 Stat. 462-63 (1996).

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

No. 98-0210/AR. U.S. v. Thomas G. BARRON. CCA 9501189. To September 17, 1998.

No. 98-0301/MC. U.S. v. Shannon L. SCHLAMER. CCA 96-0212. To September 30, 1998.

    In each of the above two cases, appellant’s motion to extend time to file final brief granted to the date indicated.

No. 98-0434/MC. U.S. v. Kasie L. DAWSON. CCA 96-2394. Appellee’s motion to extend time to file answer to final brief granted to August 31, 1998.

No. 98-0708/MC. U.S. v. Alexander J. LOGAN. CCA 97-2098. Appellant’s motion to attach documents granted.

No. 98-0887/NA. U.S. v. Ronald E. PHILLIPS. CCA 96-2444. To September 16, 1998.

No. 98-0901/MC. U.S. v. Eric A. RAMIREZ. CCA 96-2400. To September 18, 1998.

No. 98-0914/AR. U.S. v. Monty J. HARRIS. CCA 9401997. To September 21, 1998.

    In each of the above three cases, appellant’s motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted to the date indicated.

No. 98-0923/AR. U.S. v. Casey V. SINGLETON. CCA 9601353. Appellant’s motion to correct errata granted.


UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
NO. 98-222
AUGUST 21, 1998

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

No. 98-1028/MC. U.S. v. Steven L. BARTON. CCA 98-0531.

No. 98-1029/AR. U.S. v. Javier ROCHA. CCA 9700676.

No. 98-1030/AF. U.S. v. David G. BRADFORD. CCA 32511.

No. 98-1031/AF. U.S. v. James J. CAFERELLI. CCA 32972.

No. 98-1032/AF. U.S. v. Kevin K. DINETTE. CCA 33046.

No. 98-1033/AF. U.S. v. Christopher M. FRANSON. CCA 33075.

No. 98-1034/AF. U.S. v. Delphy MISSIMER. CCA 33210.

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

No. 98-0910/MC. U.S. v. Felix G. FOGG. CCA 96-1958. Appellant’s motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted to September 21, 1998.

No. 98-8010/MC. Russell B. STEELE v. Van Riper, et al. CCA 97-1615. Motion filed by Lieutenant A. L. DiGiulio to withdraw as appellate counsel granted.

MANDATES ISSUED

No. 96-1164/AF. U.S. v. Jeffrey S. COOK. CCA 31624.


UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
NO. 98-223
AUGUST 24, 1998

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

No. 98-1035/AR. U.S. v. Steven QUINTANILLA. CCA 9800218.

No. 98-1036/AR. U.S. v. Courtland WALLER. CCA 9700807.

No. 98-1037/MC. U.S. v. Samuel H. JETER. CCA 97-1678.

No. 98-1038/MC. U.S. v. Richard D. NIXON. CCA 96-0073.

No. 98-1039/NA. U.S. v. Kevin M. ROBERTS. CCA 97-0767.

No. 98-1040/AF. U.S. v. David M. KLEMENS. CCA 32981.

No. 98-1041/AF. U.S. v. Don L. MCCORMICK, III. CCA 33205.

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

No. 98-0795/NA. U.S. v. Craig D. BROWNFIELD. CCA 93-1483. To August 28, 1998.

No. 98-0828/NA. U.S. v. Cortney A. RILEY. CCA 97-0631. To September 25, 1998.

    In each of the above two cases, appellant’s second motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted to the date indicated.

No. 98-8021/CG. U.S. v. DeMauri M. FRAZIER. CCA 001-98. Appellant’s motion to amend certificate of filing and service to writ appeal petition granted.


UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
NO. 98-224
AUGUST 25, 1998

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

No. 98-1042/AR. U.S. v. Antonio L. JONES. CCA 9700934.

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

No. 97-0047/AR. U.S. v. Andrew G. AULL. CCA 9402074. To September 23, 1998.

No. 98-0940/AR. U.S. v. Michael D. SPRIGGS. CCA 9601685. To September 15, 1998.

    In each of the above two cases, appellant’s motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted to the date indicated.

No. 97-1061/CG. U.S. v. Frank J. DIRE. CCA 1077. Appellee’s motion to extend time to file answer to final brief granted to September 4, 1998; motion filed by Lieutenant William G. Rospars to withdraw as appellate counsel granted.

No. 98-0825/MC. U.S. v. Shanard R. MCDANIELS. CCA 97-0570. Appellant’s second motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted to September 25, 1998.

No. 98-5031/CG. U.S. v. Jason R. GAMMONS. CCA 1078. Motion filed by Lieutenant William G. Rospars to withdraw as appellate counsel granted.


UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
NO. 98-225
AUGUST 26, 1998

ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW

No. 98-0581/MC. U.S. v. Mary Julia E. HAAGENSON. CCA 96-1296. Review granted on the following issues raised by appellate defense counsel:

I. WHETHER THE LOWER COURT ERRED WHEN 1) IT AFFIRMED THE FINDINGS AND SENTENCE WHEN THE GOVERNMENT FAILED TO ESTABLISH THAT THE COURT-MARTIAL PANEL WAS SELECTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLES 25 AND 37, UCMJ, AND 2) FAILED TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF APPARENT UNLAWFUL COMMAND INFLUENCE AT ALL.

II. WHETHER THE LOWER COURT ERRED WHEN IT DETERMINED THAT THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE THAT THE SPECIAL COURT-MARTIAL CONVENING AUTHORITY WITHDREW APPELLANT'S REFERRED CHARGE FROM A SPECIAL COURT-MARTIAL AND RE-REFERRED IT TO AN ARTICLE 32 INVESTIGATION AS A RESULT OF UNLAWFUL COMMAND INFLUENCE.

III. WHETHER THE LOWER COURT ERRED WHEN IT DETERMINED THAT APPELLANT WAS NOT DENIED HER SIXTH AMENDMENT RIGHT TO EFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL WHEN HER TRIAL DEFENSE COUNSEL FAILED TO PRESENT ANY WITNESSES IN THE SENTENCING CASE AND WAITED UNTIL DELIBERATIONS ON FINDINGS TO BEGIN GATHERING FAVORABLE DOCUMENTARY SENTENCING EVIDENCE.

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED

No. 98-0069/AF. U.S. v. Kevin M. FOX. CCA S29308.

No. 98-0348/NA. U.S. v. David P. SCHREINER. CCA 97-0968.

No. 98-0366/NA. U.S. v. John D. WILLIAMS. CCA 97-0250.

No. 98-0424/AF. U.S. v. Michael R. TERRY. CCA 32775.

No. 98-0621/NA. U.S. v. Timothy L. WILLIAMS. CCA 97-0649.

No. 98-0745/AF. U.S. v. Steven G. OSTBERG. CCA S29463.

    In each of the above six cases, Judge Sullivan filed the following dissent:

    SULLIVAN, Judge (dissenting):

    See my separate opinions in United States v. Roseboro, No.98-0439, __ MJ __ at __ (Daily Journal July 27, 1998) (Sullivan, J., dissenting), and United States v. Gorski, 47 MJ 370, 367 (1997) (Sullivan, J., concurring in part and in the result).

    Judge Effron did not participate in any of the above six decisions. See United States v. Gorski, No. 97-0034, MJ (Daily Journal September 8, 1997). This is without prejudice to his future participation in these cases should they subsequently be presented to this Court in a manner that does not require determination of the application of the Ex Post Facto Clause of the United States Constitution to the amendments to Title 10, United States Code, made by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996, Pub.L.No. 104-106, 110 Stat. 462-63 (1996).

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW - OTHER SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS

No. 98-0215/AF. U.S. v. Austin N. MOORE. CCA 32499. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals in the above-entitled case, in light of United States v. Gorski, 47 MJ 370 (1997), it is ordered that the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals is set aside. The record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Air Force for remand to that court for consideration of whether the amendment to Article 57(a), Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 USC § 857(a), made by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996, Pub.L.No. 104-106, 110 Stat. 462-63 (1996), affects the sentence in this case. Following these proceedings, Article 67(a), UCMJ, 10 USC § 867(a)(1994), will apply.

    SULLIVAN, Judge (concurring):

    I concur. See my separate opinion in United States v. Gorski, 47 MJ 370, 367 (1997).

    Judge Effron did not participate in this decision. See United States v. Gorski, No. 97-0034, MJ (Daily Journal September 8, 1997). This is without prejudice to his future participation in this case should it subsequently be presented to this Court in a manner that does not require determination of the application of the Ex Post Facto Clause of the United States Constitution to the amendments to Title 10, United States Code, made by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996, Pub.L.No. 104-106, 110 Stat. 462-63 (1996).

No. 98-0468/AR. U.S. v. David E. NIX. CCA 9600778. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals in the above-entitled case, in light of United States v. Gorski, 47 MJ 370 (1997), it is ordered that the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals is set aside. The record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Army for remand to that court for consideration of whether the amendment to Article 57(a), Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 USC § 857(a), and the addition of Article 58b, UCMJ, 10 USC § 858b, made by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996, Pub.L.No. 104-106, 110 Stat. 462-63 (1996), affect the sentence in this case. Following these proceedings, Article 67(a), UCMJ,10 USC § 867(a)(1994), will apply.

    SULLIVAN, Judge (concurring):

    I concur. See my separate opinion in United States v. Gorski, 47 MJ 370, 367 (1997).

    Judge Effron did not participate in this decision. See United States v. Gorski, No. 97-0034, MJ (Daily Journal September 8, 1997). This is without prejudice to his future participation in this case should it subsequently be presented to this Court in a manner that does not require determination of the application of the Ex Post Facto Clause of the United States Constitution to the amendments to Title 10, United States Code, made by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996, Pub.L.No. 104-106, 110 Stat. 462-63 (1996).

No. 98-0802/MC. U.S. v. Christopher M. BYARS. CCA 96-2164. Appellant’s motion to withdraw petition for grant of review granted.

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

No. 98-0385/AR. U.S. v. Daniel J. DE SANTI. CCA 9601323.*/

No. 98-1043/AR. U.S. v. Alan S. YERICH. CCA 9500978.

No. 98-1044/MC. U.S. v. Christopher GREENE. CCA 98-0090.

No. 98-1045/AF. U.S. v. Michael A. BILBEY, Jr. CCA 32616.

No. 98-1046/AF. U.S. v. Eddie L. HALL. CCA S29382.

No. 98-1047/AF. U.S. v. Abdul O. DULIN. CCA 33183.

No. 98-1048/AF. U.S. v. Felix A. OTERO, III. CCA S29545.

No. 98-1049/AF. U.S. v. Richard E. MCSHEFFREY. CCA 32938.

PETITIONS FOR RECONSIDERATION DENIED

Misc. No. 98-8008/AF and Misc. 98-8011/AF. Frank S. HALL, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES, respondent. Petitioner’s motion for reconsideration of dismissal for lack of a speedy trial and prosecutorial misconduct, which the Court construes as a petition for reconsideration, denied.

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

No. 98-0439/AR. U.S. v. Clevell S. ROSEBORO, II. CCA 9600788.
Appellee’s motion to file out of time granted; appellee’s motion to extend time to file answer to show cause order granted to August 28, 1998.

    Judge Effron did not participate in this decision. See United States v. Gorski, No. 97-0034, MJ (Daily Journal September 8, 1997). This is without prejudice to his future participation in this case should it subsequently be presented to this Court in a manner that does not require determination of the application of the Ex Post Facto Clause of the United States Constitution to the amendments to Title 10, United States Code, made by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996, Pub.L.No. 104-106, 110 Stat. 462-63 (1996).
____________

*/ Second petition filed in same case.


UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
NO. 98-226
AUGUST 27, 1998

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED

No. 98-0586/AR. U.S. v. Charles A. SEDGWICK. CCA 9600543.

No. 98-0780/AF. U.S. v. Dennis A. JOHNSON. CCA S29453.

No. 98-0827/MC. U.S. v. Chadme J. JOSEPH. CCA 97-1254.

No. 98-0833/AR. U.S. v. David HERNANDEZ-RIVERA. CCA 9700183.

No. 98-0848/AR. U.S. v. Lafrantz D. ONEAL. CCA 9601611.

No. 98-0852/MC. U.S. v. David B. SCHAMBER. CCA 97-2025.

No. 98-0854/AR. U.S. v. Charles A. EDEKI. CCA 9601834.

No. 98-0858/AF. U.S. v. Lewis J. BANKS, Jr. CCA 33163.

No. 98-0864/MC. U.S. v. Christopher L. BRIDGEMAN. CCA 97-1789.

No. 98-0872/NA. U.S. v. Darrel W. LEVITCH. CCA 96-2141.

No. 98-0875/AF. U.S. v. Brandon P. GROVES. CCA S29331.

No. 98-0876/AF. U.S. v. Ronale D. JOHNSON. CCA S29359.

No. 98-0885/AR. U.S. v. Brian P. GRAML. CCA 9602000.

No. 98-0892/NA. U.S. v. James A. GARDIN. CCA 97-0801.

No. 98-0893/NA. U.S. v. Kyle J. MARSHALL. CCA 97-1778.

No. 98-0896/AF. U.S. v. Charles W. WILSON. CCA S29507.

No. 98-0908/AR. U.S. v. Lora A. TIRADO. CCA 9701742.

No. 98-0915/AR. U.S. v. Thilenius NAPIER. CCA 9601347.

No. 98-0928/AR. U.S. v. David P. GUTHRIE. CCA 9700236.

No. 98-0932/AF. U.S. v. John M. BRUNER. CCA 33021.

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

No. 98-1050/NA. U.S. v. Daniel H. CARPENTER. CCA 97-2146.

No. 98-1051/AR. U.S. v. Jacob P. SWEENEY. CCA 9600447.

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

No. 98-0109/AF. U.S. v. Jeffrey R. RICHTER. CCA 32106. Appellee’s motion to file brief in excess of 50 pages granted.


UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
NO. 98-227
AUGUST 28, 1998

RETURN OF RECORD FROM COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

No. 93-0208/AF. U.S. v. Frank S. HALL. CCA 29863. The record of trial was returned to the Clerk’s Office, in accordance with the earlier decision of this Court, 45 MJ 255 (1996), and has been referred to the Court for further consideration.

APPEALS - SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS

No. 98-0083/AF. U.S. v. Matthew S. ATER. CCA 32581. The petition for grant of review is granted and the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals on further review is affirmed. [See also ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW this date.]

ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW

No. 96-0507/MC. U.S. v. William S. MCLAUGHLIN, III. CCA 94-2095. Review granted on the following issue:

WHETHER THE NAVY-MARINE CORPS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS ERRED WHEN IT REFUSED TO REMAND THIS CASE, SO THAT APPELLANT COULD LITIGATE A SPEEDY TRIAL ISSUE, AFTER THE COURT CONCLUDED APPELLANT'S PRETRIAL AGREEMENT CONTAINED AN UNLAWFUL PROVISION IN CLEAR VIOLATION OF RULE FOR COURTS-MARTIAL 705(C)(1)(B). No. 98-0083/AF. U.S. v. Matthew S. ATER. CCA 32581. [See also APPEALS - SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS this date.]

No. 98-0471/MC. U.S. v. Rodney O. MORRIS. CCA 96-1146. Review granted on the following issue:

WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE ERRED BY WITHHOLDING DOCUMENTS, AFTER AN IN CAMERA REVIEW, FROM THE DEFENSE WHICH CONSISTED OF (1) THE VICTIM'S MEDICAL AND FAMILY SERVICE CENTER RECORDS WHICH CONTAINED REFERENCES TO SYMPTOMS AND DIAGNOSES OF POST TRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER AND (2) AN INCIDENT COMPLAINT REPORT OF A RAPE ALLEGATION MADE BY THE VICTIM AGAINST A DIFFERENT MARINE SIX MONTHS PRIOR TO THE ALLEGATION MADE AGAINST APPELLANT. No. 98-0704/AF. U.S. v. Jon A. COOPER. CCA 32388. Review granted on the following issue: WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE PREJUDICED APPELLANT BY ABANDONING HIS IMPARTIAL ROLE AND WRONGFULLY REPRIMANDING TRIAL DEFENSE COUNSEL BEFORE THE MEMBERS FOLLOWING DEFENSE COUNSEL'S COMPLAINT TO THE MILITARY JUDGE THAT HE APPEARED TO BE HELPING THE PROSECUTION PERFECT THEIR (SIC) CASE, AND BY WRONGFULLY COMMENTING ON THE QUALITY OF THE EVIDENCE.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED

No. 98-0616/AR. U.S. v. Todd A. FREEMAN. CCA 9700958.

No. 98-0843/AR. U.S. v. Raymond M. CRUZ, Jr. CCA 9701356.

No. 98-0879/NA. U.S. v. Mark D. BOYCE. CCA 97-1189.

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

No. 98-1052/AF. U.S. v. Jesse J. KETOLA. CCA 33029.

No. 98-1053/AF. U.S. v. Preston K. MORALES. CCA 32831.


UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
NO. 98-228
AUGUST 31, 1998

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

No. 98-1054/AR. U.S. v. Michael L. KRIER. CCA 9701668.

No. 98-1055/AR. U.S. v. Ruadz A. BROS. CCA 9800108.

No. 98-1056/AR. U.S. v. Keegan J. KELLY. CCA 9600832.

No. 98-1057/NA. U.S. v. Jack E. AUTREY. CCA 98-0290.

No. 98-1058/NA. U.S. v. Brian L. HANLEY. CCA 98-0622.
  

Home Page