UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 04-243

Thursday, September 30, 2004

 

APPEALS - SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS

 

No. 03-0518/MC.  U.S. v. Teon E. JACKSON.  CCA 200001671.  On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals, and in light of our recent decision in United States v. Jenkins, 60 M.J. 27 (C.A.A.F. 2004), it is ordered that said petition is granted on the following issue:

 

WHETHER THE LOWER COURT'S VERBATIM REPLICATION OF SUBSTANTIAL PORTIONS OF THE GOVERNMENT'S ARGUMENT AS THE COURT'S OPINION CONSTITUTES AN ABUSE OF DISCRETION, NEGATES ANY APPEARANCE OF JUDICIAL IMPARTIALITY AND SUBSTANTIALLY UNDERMINES THE INTEGRITY OF THE OPINION.

 

The decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals is set aside.  The record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy for remand to that court for a new review pursuant to Article 66(c), Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 866(c) (2000), before a panel comprised of judges who have not previously participated in this case.  [See also ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW this date.]

 

No. 03-0538/MC.  U.S. v. Nathan T. OTTO.  CCA 200001460.  On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals, and in light of our recent decision in United States v. Jenkins, 60 M.J. 27 (C.A.A.F. 2004), it is ordered that said petition is granted on the following issue:

 

WHETHER THE LOWER COURT'S VERBATIM REPLICATION OF SUBSTANTIAL PORTIONS OF THE GOVERNMENT'S ANSWER BRIEF AS THAT COURT'S OPINION CONSTITUTES AN ABUSE OF DISCRETION, NEGATES ANY APPEARANCE OF JUDICIAL IMPARTIALITY AND SUBSTANTIALLY UNDERMINES THE INTEGRITY OF THE OPINION.

 

The decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals is set aside.  The record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy for remand to that court for a new review pursuant to Article 66(c), Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 866(c) (2000), before a panel comprised of judges who have not previously participated in this case.  [See also ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW this date.]

 

No. 03-0588/NA.  U.S. v. Antoinette VANDERBILT.  CCA 200000487.  On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals, and in light of our recent decision in United States v. Jenkins, 60 M.J. 27 (C.A.A.F. 2004), it is ordered that said petition is granted on the following issue:

 

WHETHER THE LOWER COURT'S VERBATIM REPLICATION OF SUBSTANTIAL PORTIONS OF THE GOVERNMENT'S ANSWER BRIEF AS THAT COURT'S OPINION CONSTITUTES AN ABUSE OF DISCRETION, NEGATES ANY APPEARANCE OF JUDICIAL IMPARTIALITY AND SUBSTANTIALLY UNDERMINES THE INTEGRITY OF THE OPINION.

 

The decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals is set aside.  The record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy for remand to that court for a new review pursuant to Article 66(c), Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 866(c) (2000), before a panel comprised of judges who have not previously participated in this case.  [See also ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW this date.]

 

No. 03-0591/NA.  U.S. v. Thomas N. CREAM.  CCA 200200962.  On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals, and in light of our recent decision in United States v. Jenkins, 60 M.J. 27 (C.A.A.F. 2004), it is ordered that said petition is granted on the following issue:

 

WHETHER THE LOWER COURT'S VERBATIM REPLICATION OF SUBSTANTIAL PORTIONS OF THE GOVERNMENT'S ANSWER BRIEF AS THAT COURT'S OPINION CONSTITUTES AN ABUSE OF DISCRETION, NEGATES ANY APPEARANCE OF JUDICIAL IMPARTIALITY AND SUBSTANTIALLY UNDERMINES THE INTEGRITY OF THE OPINION.

 

The decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals is set aside.  The record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy for remand to that court for a new review pursuant to Article 66(c), Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 866(c) (2000), before a panel comprised of judges who have not previously participated in this case.  [See also ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW this date.]

 

No. 04-0069/MC.  U.S. v. David Y. OWENS.  CCA 200200427.  On further consideration of this case, and in light of our decision in United States v. Jenkins, 60 M.J. 27 (C.A.A.F. 2004), it is ordered that the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals is set aside.  The record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy for remand to that court for a new review pursuant to Article 66(c), Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 866(c) (2000), before a panel comprised of judges who have not previously participated in this case.

 

No. 04-0219/MC.  U.S. v. Scipio J. WILLIAMS.  CCA 200101854.  On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals, and in light of our recent decision in United States v. Jenkins, 60 M.J. 27 (C.A.A.F. 2004), it is ordered that said petition is granted on the following issue:

 

WHETHER THE LOWER COURT'S VERBATIM REPLICATION OF SUBSTANTIAL PORTIONS OF THE GOVERNMENT'S ARGUMENT AS THE COURT'S OPINION CONSTITUTES AN ABUSE OF DISCRETION, NEGATES ANY APPEARANCE OF JUDICIAL IMPARTIALITY AND SUBSTANTIALLY UNDERMINES THE INTEGRITY OF THE OPINION.

 

The decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals is set aside.  The record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy for remand to that court for a new review pursuant to Article 66(c), Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 866(c) (2000), before a panel comprised of judges who have not previously participated in this case.  [See also ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW this date.]

 

No. 04-0350/MC.  U.S. v. Whitman D. WALLACE.  CCA 200001148.  On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals, and in light of our recent decision in United States v. Jenkins, 60 M.J. 27 (C.A.A.F. 2004), it is ordered that said petition is granted on the following issue:

 

WHETHER THE LOWER COURT'S VERBATIM REPLICATION OF SUBSTANTIAL PORTIONS OF THE GOVERNMENT'S ARGUMENT AS THE COURT'S OPINION CONSTITUTES AN ABUSE OF DISCRETION, NEGATES ANY APPEARANCE OF JUDICIAL IMPARTIALITY AND SUBSTANTIALLY UNDERMINES THE INTEGRITY OF THE OPINION.

 

The decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals is set aside.  The record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy for remand to that court for a new review pursuant to Article 66(c), Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 866(c) (2000), before a panel comprised of judges who have not previously participated in this case.  [See also ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW this date.]

 

No. 04-0372/MC.  U.S. v. Jeremy D. THOMPSON.  CCA 200101956.  On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals, and in light of our recent decision in United States v. Jenkins, 60 M.J. 27 (C.A.A.F. 2004), it is ordered that said petition is granted on the following issue:

 

WHETHER THE LOWER COURT'S VERBATIM REPLICATION OF SUBSTANTIAL PORTIONS OF THE GOVERNMENT'S ARGUMENT AS THE COURT'S OPINION CONSTITUTES AN ABUSE OF DISCRETION, NEGATES ANY APPEARANCE OF JUDICIAL IMPARTIALITY AND SUBSTANTIALLY UNDERMINES THE INTEGRITY OF THE OPINION.

 

The decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals is set aside.  The record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy for remand to that court for a new review pursuant to Article 66(c), Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 866(c) (2000), before a panel comprised of judges who have not previously participated in this case.  [See also ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW this date.]

 

No. 04-0442/AF.  U.S. v. Christopher P. MOFFEIT.  CCA 35159.  On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals, and in light of this Court’s decision in United States v. O’Connor, 58 M.J. 450 (C.A.A.F. 2003), it is ordered that said petition is granted on the following issue:

 

WHETHER APPELLANT'S CONVICTION FOR RECEIVING AND POSSESSING CHILD PORNOGRAPHY UNDER 18 U.S.C. § 2252A MUST BE SET ASIDE.

 

The decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals as to Specifications 1 and 2 of the Charge and the sentence is reversed, but is affirmed in all other respects.  The findings of guilty of Specifications 1 and 2 of the Charge and the sentence are set aside.  The record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Air Force for remand to the Court of Criminal Appeals.  That court may either dismiss Specifications 1 and 2 of the Charge and reassess the sentence based on the affirmed guilty findings or order a rehearing.  [See also ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW this date.]

 

CRAWFORD, Chief Judge (dissenting):  I dissent from the order setting aside Specifications 1 and 2 of the Charge for the reasons set forth in my separate opinion in United States v. O’Connor, 58 M.J. 450, 455 (C.A.A.F. 2003) (Crawford, C.J., dissenting).

 

No. 04-0464/AF.  U.S. v. Tracy L. DAVIDSON.  CCA 34911.  On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals, said petition is granted and the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed.  [See also ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW this date.]

 

No. 04-0491/AR.  U.S. v. Fabian G. PEREZ.  CCA 20011030.  On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals, and in light of our decision in United States v. Lajaunie, ___ M.J. ___ (Daily Journal July 21, 2004), it is ordered that said petition is granted on the following specified issue:

 

WHETHER THE UNITED STATES ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS EXCEEDED ITS AUTHORITY UNDER ARTICLE 66(c), UCMJ, BY AFFIRMING A SENTENCE THAT WAS NOT CORRECT IN LAW AND FACT AND WAS GREATER THAN THAT INTENDED TO BE APPROVED BY THE CONVENING AUTHORITY.

 

The decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals and the convening authority’s action are set aside.  The record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Army for remand to a convening authority for a new action in light of this Court’s decision in United States v. Emminizer, 56 M.J. 441 (C.A.A.F. 2002).  [See also ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW this date.]

 

CRAWFORD, Chief Judge (dissenting):  I dissent for the reasons set forth in my dissenting opinion in United States v. Lajaunie, ___ M.J. ___ (Daily Journal July 21, 2004) (Crawford, C.J., dissenting).

 

No. 04-0509/AF.  U.S. v. Robert L. SEITTER.  CCA 34973.  On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals, and in light of our decision in United States v. Lajaunie, ___ M.J. ___ (Daily Journal July 21, 2004), it is ordered that said petition is granted on the following issue:

 

WHETHER THE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS EXCEEDED ITS AUTHORITY UNDER ARTICLE 66(c) UCMJ, BY AFFIRMING A SENTENCE THAT WAS NOT CORRECT IN LAW AND FACT AND WAS GREATER THAN THAT INTENDED TO BE APPROVED BY THE CONVENING AUTHORITY.

 

The decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals and the convening authority’s action are set aside.  The record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Air Force for remand to a convening authority for a new action in light of this Court’s decision in United States v. Emminizer, 56 M.J. 441 (C.A.A.F. 2002).  [See also ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW this date.]

 

CRAWFORD, Chief Judge (dissenting):  I dissent for the reasons set forth in my dissenting opinion in United States v. Lajaunie, ___ M.J. ___ (Daily Journal July 21, 2004) (Crawford, C.J., dissenting).

 

ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW

 

No. 03-0518/MC.  U.S. v. Teon E. JACKSON.  CCA 200001671.  [See also APPEALS – SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS this date.]

 

No. 03-0538/MC.  U.S. v. Nathan T. OTTO.  CCA 200001460.  [See also APPEALS – SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS this date.]

 

No. 03-0588/NA.  U.S. v. Antoinette VANDERBILT.  CCA 200000487.  [See also APPEALS – SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS this date.]

 

No. 03-0591/NA.  U.S. v. Thomas N. CREAM.  CCA 200200962.  [See also APPEALS – SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS this date.]

 

No. 04-0219/MC.  U.S. v. Scipio J. WILLIAMS.  CCA 200101854.  [See also APPEALS – SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS this date.]

 

No. 04-0350/MC.  U.S. v. Whitman D. WALLACE.  CCA 200001148.  [See also APPEALS – SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS this date.]

 

No. 04-0372/MC.  U.S. v. Jeremy D. THOMPSON.  CCA 200101956.  [See also APPEALS – SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS this date.]

 

No. 04-0442/AF.  U.S. v. Christopher P. MOFFEIT.  CCA 35159.  [See also APPEALS – SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS this date.]

 

No. 04-0464/AF.  U.S. v. Tracy L. DAVIDSON.  CCA 34911.  [See also APPEALS – SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS this date.]

 

No. 04-0491/AR.  U.S. v. Fabian G. PEREZ.  CCA 20011030.  [See also APPEALS – SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS this date.]

 

No. 04-0509/AF.  U.S. v. Robert L. SEITTER.  CCA 34973.  [See also APPEALS – SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS this date.]

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED

 

No. 04-0339/NA.  U.S. v. Robert J. CROSS.  CCA 200101055.

No. 04-0602/NA.  U.S. v. Hector CAMARILLO Jr.  CCA 200301464.*/

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 04-0801/MC.  U.S. v. Jemima HARVEY.  CCA 200001040.

No. 04-0802/MC.  U.S. v. Ladine DANIELS.  CCA 200400010.

 

____________

 

*/  It is directed that the promulgating order be corrected to reflect that Appellant was found guilty of the Specification of the Charge by exceptions and substitutions in accordance with his pleas.


--------------------------------------------
 

ANNOUNCEMENT

by the

 

CLERK OF THE COURT

 

of the

 

CUMULATIVE SUMMARY OF

 

COURT WORKLOAD STATISTICS

 

FOR THE OCTOBER 2004 TERM OF COURT

 

 

I.  CUMULATIVE PENDING OCTOBER 1, 2003

 

    Master Docket ..............................  49

    Petition Docket ............................ 171

    Miscellaneous Docket .......................   4

    TOTAL ...................................... 224

 

ii. CUMULATIVE FILINGS

 

    Master Docket .............................. 136

    Petition Docket ............................ 802

    Miscellaneous Docket .......................  29

    TOTAL ...................................... 967

 

III. CUMULATIVE TERMINATIONS

 

    Master Docket .............................. 134

    Petition Docket ............................ 758

    Miscellaneous Docket .......................  27

    TOTAL ...................................... 919

 

IV. CUMULATIVE PENDING OCTOBER 1, 2004

 

    Master Docket ..............................  51*/

    Petition Docket ............................ 215

    Miscellaneous Docket .......................   6

    TOTAL ...................................... 272

 

___

*/  Comparative Master Docket figures for the past 10 years are: 49 (FY03); 50 (FY02); 60 (FY01); 70 (FY00); 77 (FY99); 105 (FY98); 289 (FY97); 73 (FY96); 105 (FY95); 119 (FY94).


V.  CASES ON MASTER DOCKET CARRIED OVER TO OCTOBER 2005

    TERM OF COURT

 

AWAITING ORAL ARGUMENT OR FINAL DISPOSITION (40)

 

         98-0497/NA - DAVIS

         00-0679/AR - BEST

         02-0623/AR - MARTINELLI

         03-0223/AF - DEES

         03-0256/AR – BOWLEY

         03-0270/AF – POLFLIET, Jr.

         03-0293/AF - MARTENS

         03-0382/AR - BALDWIN

         03-0454/AF - ALLEN

         03-0589/AR - BODIN

         03-0635/MC - HALL

         03-0638/CG - DATZ

         03-0646/AR - FARLEY

         03-0647/AR - LEAK

         03-0655/MC - STROTHER

         03-0694/AR - SHELTON

         04-0042/AR - MEGHDADI

         04-0081/AF - SCHEURER

         04-0119/AF - WARNER

         04-0120/AR - LITTERAL

         04-0140/AR - ASBURY

         04-0145/AF - REEVES

         04-0208/AR – WILLIAMS, Jr.

         04-0216/AF - KEY

         04-0217/AF – ISRAEL, Jr.

         04-0218/MC - RICHARDSON

         04-0238/AF - HARRIS

         04-0240/AR - BERRY

         04-0241/AF – MOSES

         04-0250/AR - SCALO

         04-0252/AR - BODKINS

         04-0284/AF – JAMES

         04-0291/AR - CANO

         04-0295/AR - McNUTT

         04-0340/MC - BAIER

         04-0348/AR – BROOKS

         04-0382/AF - MIZGALA

         04-5002/AF - CARTER

         04-5004/AR – SINGLETON

         04-5006/AR - KREUTZER

 

AWAITING BRIEFS (11)

 

         02-0060/MC - JONES

         03-0568/AR - BILLINGS

         03-0678/AR - STEBBINS

         04-0178/AR – SAINTAUDE, Jr.

         04-0359/AR - SHELTON

         04-0392/AF – GRIGGS

         04-0433/AF - STARGELL

         04-0465/AF - FLETCHER

         04-0480/AF - SONEGO

         04-0540/AF - BARRIER

         04-5005/NA - FORBES

 


 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 04-242

Wednesday, September 29, 2004

 

APPEALS - SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS

 

No. 03-0403/NA.  U.S. v. Robert F. BRINTON.  CCA 200001971.  On further consideration of this case, and in light of our decision in United States v. Jenkins, 60 M.J. 27 (C.A.A.F. 2004), it is ordered that the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals is set aside.  The record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy for remand to that court for a new review pursuant to Article 66(c), Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 866(c) (2000), before a panel comprised of judges who have not previously participated in this case.

 

No. 03-0515/NA.  U.S. v. Thomas J. SCHNABLE.  CCA 9900852.  On further consideration of this case, and in light of our decision in United States v. Jenkins, 60 M.J. 27 (C.A.A.F. 2004), it is ordered that the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals is set aside.  The record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy for remand to that court for a new review pursuant to Article 66(c), Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 866(c) (2000), before a panel comprised of judges who have not previously participated in this case.

 

No. 03-0578/NA.  U.S. v. Jeffrey B. MAZER.  CCA 200001655.  On further consideration of this case, and in light of our decision in United States v. Jenkins, 60 M.J. 27 (C.A.A.F. 2004), it is ordered that the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals is set aside.  The record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy for remand to that court for a new review pursuant to Article 66(c), Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 866(c) (2000), before a panel comprised of judges who have not previously participated in this case.

 

No. 03-0613/MC.  U.S. v. Jimmie L. GETER.  CCA 9901433.  On further consideration of this case, and in light of our decision in United States v. Jenkins, 60 M.J. 27 (C.A.A.F. 2004), it is ordered that the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals is set aside.  The record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy for remand to that court for a new review pursuant to Article 66(c), Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 866(c) (2000), before a panel comprised of judges who have not previously participated in this case.

 

No. 04-0067/MC.  U.S. v. Timothy T. RYAN.  CCA 9900374.  On further consideration of this case, and in light of our decision in United States v. Jenkins, 60 M.J. 27 (C.A.A.F. 2004), it is ordered that the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals is set aside.  The record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy for remand to that court for a new review pursuant to Article 66(c), Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 866(c) (2000), before a panel comprised of judges who have not previously participated in this case.

 

No. 04-0090/MC.  U.S. v. Eric W. SELL.  CCA 200200458.  On further consideration of this case, and in light of our decision in United States v. Jenkins, 60 M.J. 27 (C.A.A.F. 2004), it is ordered that the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals is set aside.  The record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy for remand to that court for a new review pursuant to Article 66(c), Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 866(c) (2000), before a panel comprised of judges who have not previously participated in this case.

 

No. 04-0177/NA.  U.S. v. John M. LYDY.  CCA 200200005.  On further consideration of this case, and in light of our decision in United States v. Jenkins, 60 M.J. 27 (C.A.A.F. 2004), it is ordered that the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals is set aside.  The record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy for remand to that court for a new review pursuant to Article 66(c), Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 866(c) (2000), before a panel comprised of judges who have not previously participated in this case.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED

 

No. 04-0482/AF.  U.S. v. Eric P. LUNDEEN.  CCA 35095.

No. 04-0577/AR.  U.S. v. Charles P. MILLER Jr.  CCA 20001033.

No. 04-0637/AR.  U.S. v. James H. COLEMAN.  CCA 20020546.

No. 04-0638/AR.  U.S. v. Cristopher W. HARPER.  CCA 20030709.

No. 04-0659/AR.  U.S. v. Justin R. ROSENBAUM.  CCA 20030710.

No. 04-0667/AF.  U.S. v. Moises ORTIZ.  CCA 35709.

No. 04-0682/AF.  U.S. v. Kyle L. ALEXANDER.  CCA 35704.

No. 04-0690/AR.  U.S. v. Jermaine MORSTON.  CCA 20040181.

No. 04-0702/AR.  U.S. v. Michael L. BAYLES.  CCA 20030898.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 04-0797/AR.  U.S. v. David P. CHRISTIAN.  CCA 20011021.

No. 04-0798/MC.  U.S. v. Walter T. STRZELEWICZ.  CCA 200202313.

No. 04-0799/NA.  U.S. v. Timothy E. MILLER.  CCA 200400762.

No. 04-0800/AF.  U.S. v. James MORENO, Jr.  CCA S30552.  [See also INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS this date.]

 

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

 

No. 03-0568/AR.  U.S. v. Jacqueline BILLINGS.  CCA 9900122.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file final brief granted, but only up to and including October 19, 2004; and absent extraordinary circumstances, no further extension of time will be granted in this case.

 

No. 04-0615/MC.  U.S. v. Felix F. VELEZ.  CCA 200301143.  Appellee's motion to correct errata granted.

 

No. 04-0724/AR.  U.S. v. Stephen C. ADAMS.  CCA 20010664.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted to October 29, 2004.

 

No. 04-0728/AR.  U.S. v. Joel M. DELA CIRNA.  CCA 20030338. Appellant's motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted to November 1, 2004.

 

No. 04-0800/AF.  U.S. v. James MORENO, Jr.  CCA S30552.  Notice is hereby given that a petition for grant of review was offered for filing under Rule 20 together with Appellant’s supplement to petition for grant of review and motion to file the same out of time this date.  Appellee shall file an answer to Appellant’s motion on or before the 6th day of October, 2004.  Further action on the petition shall be held in abeyance pending the Court’s final action on the motion.  [See also PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED this date.]

 



UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 04-241

Tuesday, September 28, 2004


PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED

 

No. 04-0586/MC.  U.S. v. Ryan P. SMITH.  CCA 200102227.

No. 04-0587/AR.  U.S. v. Kenneth L. PROCTOR.  CCA 20030200.

No. 04-0590/NA.  U.S. v. Kevin A. ROSENBERG.  CCA 200100797.

No. 04-0609/CG.  U.S. v. Gregory L. TURNER.  CCA 1206.

No. 04-0628/MC.  U.S. v. Clevon O. HAYDEN.  CCA 200100457.

No. 04-0630/AR.  U.S. v. Brian J. LEA.  CCA 20031156.

No. 04-0632/MC.  U.S. v. Eric W. PETRIE.  CCA 200301535.

No. 04-0645/MC.  U.S. v. Eric FLORES.  CCA 200301731.

No. 04-0652/NA.  U.S. v. Jeremy A. HEFFINGTON.  CCA 200301028.

No. 04-0672/AR.  U.S. v. Ledarrick T. HURST.  CCA 20030363.

 

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

 

No. 03-0678/AR.  U.S. v. John H. STEBBINS.  CCA 20000497.  Appellant's second and final motion to extend time to file supplemental brief granted up to and including October 6, 2004; and, no further extension of time will be granted in this case.

 

No. 04-0291/AR.  U.S. v. Arturo CANO.  CCA 20010086.  Appellee's motion to extend time to file an answer to final brief granted up to and including September 29, 2004; and, absent extraordinary circumstances, no further extension of time will be granted in this case.

 


 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 04-240

Monday, September 27, 2004


PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 01-0653/AF.  U.S. v. Christopher T. MILES.  CCA 34094.*/

No. 04-0791/AR.  U.S. v. David F. DALTON, Jr.  CCA 20040187.

No. 04-0792/AR.  U.S. v. James M. JOSEPH, III.  CCA 20031093.

No. 04-0793/AR.  U.S. v. Marvin L. McPHATTER.  CCA 20030044.

No. 04-0794/AF.  U.S. v. Tristen K. WENTLING.  CCA 35760.

No. 04-0795/AF.  U.S. v. Jeffrey R. WATERMAN.  CCA S30500.

No. 04-0796/NA.  U.S. v. Abram C. CONLEY, III.  CCA 200201849.

 

 

__________

 

*/  Second petition filed in this case.

 



UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 04-239

Friday, September 24, 2004

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 04-0784/AF.  U.S. v. Carlos J. WILLIAMS.  CCA 35066.

No. 04-0785/AF.  U.S. v. Brian E. WATERMAN, Jr.  CCA S30137.

No. 04-0786/AF.  U.S. v. Anetra S. TAYLOR.  CCA S30327.

No. 04-0787/AF.  U.S. v. Samuel E. SZPAK.  CCA S30523.

No. 04-0788/AF.  U.S. v. Brian W. SCHUMANN.  CCA 35119.

No. 04-0789/AF.  U.S. v. Fabian PORTUNATO.  CCA 35245.

No. 04-0790/AF.  U.S. v. Marcus A. HARDY.  CCA 35371.

 

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

 

No. 03-0694/AR.  U.S. v. Darrell L. SHELTON.  CCA 9900816.  Motion filed by Charles Temple to appear pro hac vice, for students to appear on behalf of Franklin Pierce Law Center and to present oral argument granted.

 

No. 04-0683/MC.  U.S. v. Amy R. WALLACE.  CCA 200100296.  Appellant's second motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted up to and including October 22, 2004; and absent extraordinary circumstances, no further extension of time will be granted in this case.

 

No. 04-0715/AR.  U.S. v. Guillermo BAZARTE.  CCA 20020135.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted to October 27, 2004.

 

No. 04-0717/AR.  U.S. v. Oji A. NURI.  CCA 20020353.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted to October 27, 2004.

  



UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 04-238

Thursday, September 23, 2004


MISCELLANEOUS DOCKET - FILINGS

 

Misc. No. 04-8029/NA.  Reginold D. ALLISON, Petitioner, v. The Judge Advocate General of the Navy and United States, Respondents.  CCA 200000637.  Notice is hereby given that a petition for extraordinary relief was filed under Rule 27(a) on August 31, 2004, and placed on the docket this date.  On consideration thereof, it is ordered that upon the Court’s own motion, the Judge Advocate General of the Navy is added as a Respondent; and that Respondents show cause on or before October 4, 2004, why the requested relief should not be granted.

 

CRAWFORD, Chief Judge (dissenting):  See my dissent in Toohey v. United States, 60 M.J. 100 (C.A.A.F. 2004).

  



UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 04-237

Wednesday, September 22, 2004


PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 04-0783/AR.  U.S. v. James L. WHEELER.  CCA 20030997.

  



UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 04-236

Tuesday, September 21, 2004


PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW - OTHER SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS

 

No. 04-6002/AR.  U.S. v. Anthony E. MCCULLOUGH.  CCA 20031217.  Appellant’s motion to withdraw the petition for grant of review granted and motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review denied as moot.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 04-0782/AR.  U.S. v. Clinton J. DEYLE.  CCA 20040119.

 

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

 

No. 98-0497/NA.  U.S. v. Charles W. DAVIS.  CCA 9600585.  Appellee’s motion to extend time to file an answer to final brief granted up to and including September 24, 2004; and absent extraordinary circumstances, no further extension of time will be granted in this case; motion to correct errata granted.

 

No. 04-0591/NA.  U.S. v. E’ Randal K. WILLIS.  CCA 200200842. Appellant's motion to withdraw the petition for grant of review denied.  Had this motion been granted, Appellant’s conviction would be rendered final under Article 76, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 876 (2002).  Such a result would be inconsistent with the reasons to withdraw provided in the motion.

 

No. 04-0698/MC.  U.S. v. Javier A. MORENO.  CCA 200100715.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted to September 30, 2004.



 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 04-235

Monday, September 20, 2004

 

APPEALS - SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS

 

No. 02-0065/AF.  U.S. v. Ryan W. DAVIS.  CCA 33877.  On consideration of Appellant’s petition for grant of review, and in light of this Court’s decisions in United States v. Marcum, 60 M.J. 198 (C.A.A.F. 2004), United States v. Mason, 60 M.J. 15 (C.A.A.F. 2004), and United States v. O’Connor, 58 M.J. 450 (C.A.A.F. 2003), said petition is granted on the following issues:

 

WHETHER PROSECUTION UNDER ARTICLE 125 VIOLATES SUBSTANTIVE DUE PROCESS BY UNFAIRLY INFRINGING ON SERVICEMEMBERS’ FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT TO PRIVACY.  ALSO WHETHER PROSECUTION UNDER ARTICLE 125 FOR PRIVATE CONSENSUAL NON-COMMERCIAL SODOMY VIOLATES A STATUTORILY ESTABLISHED ZONE OF PRIVACY WITHOUT A COMPELLING GOVERNMENT INTEREST.

 

WHETHER APPELLANT'S PLEA OF GUILTY TO POSSESSING AND TRANSPORTING CHILD PORNOGRAPHY UNDER 18 U.S.C. § 2252A IS IMPROVIDENT BECAUSE CONVICTION UNDER SAID STATUTE VIOLATES THE FIRST AMENDMENT’S GUARANTEE OF FREE SPEECH AND BECAUSE THE PHRASES “APPEARS TO BE” AND “CONVEYS THE IMPRESSION” IN THE STATUTE MAKE IT UNCONSTITUTIONALLY VAGUE AND OVERBROAD.

 

     In terms of Appellant’s challenge to his conviction for possessing and distributing child pornography, it is ordered that specifications 1 and 2 of Charge III are amended to read as follows:

 

In that SECOND LIEUTENANT RYAN W. DAVIS, United States Air Force, Detachment 1, 325th Fighter Wing, Pensacola Naval Air Station, Pensacola, Florida, did at or near Pensacola, Florida, on or about 15 December 1997, knowingly possess images of child pornography that had been transported in interstate commerce; in violation of Title 18, United States Code, § 2252A(a)(5)(B).

 

In that SECOND LIEUTENANT RYAN W. DAVIS, United States Air Force, Detachment 1, 325th Fighter Wing, Pensacola Naval Air Station, Pensacola, Florida, did in the continental United States between on or about 16 October 1997 and on or about 16 October 1997, knowingly distribute by computer child pornography that had been transported in interstate commerce; in violation of Title 18, United States Code, § 2252A(a)(2)(A).

 

     The decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed as to Charge III and its specifications as amended, as well as to the remaining Charges, specifications, and the sentence.  [See also ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW this date.]

 

 

No. 02-0233/AF.  U.S. v. Dale P. KEYSER.  CCA 34252.  On consideration of Appellant’s petition for grant of review, and in light of this Court’s decisions in United States v. Mason, 60 M.J. 15 (C.A.A.F. 2004), and United States v. O’Connor, 58 M.J. 450 (C.A.A.F. 2003), said petition is granted on the following issue:

 

WHETHER, IN LIGHT OF ASHCROFT v. FREE SPEECH COALITION, 535 U.S. 234 (2002), THE APPELLANT’S GUILTY PLEA IS IMPROVIDENT.

 

Specification 1 of the Charge is amended to read as follows:

 

In that TECHNICAL SERGEANT DALE P. KEYSER, United States Air Force, 93rd Maintenance Squadron, Robins Air Force Base, Georgia, did, at Robins Air Force Base, Georgia, on or about 16 April 1999, knowingly receive child pornography that had been mailed, shipped, or transported in interstate or foreign commerce by any means including computer, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, § 2252(a)(2)(A).

 

 

     The decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed as to the Charge and specification 1 as amended, as well as to the sentence.  [See also ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW this date.]

 

 

No. 02-0844/AF.  U.S. v. Jason P. APPELDORN.  CCA 34942.  On consideration of Appellant’s petition for grant of review, and in light of this Court’s decisions in United States v. Mason, 60 M.J. 15 (C.A.A.F. 2004), and United States v. O’Connor, 58 M.J. 450 (C.A.A.F. 2003), said petition is granted on the following issue:

 

WHETHER THE FINDINGS OF GUILTY IN THIS CASE CAN BE AFFIRMED IN LIGHT OF ASHCROFT v. FREE SPEECH COALITION, 535 U.S. 234 (2002).

 

Specifications 1 and 2 of the Charge are amended to read as follows:

 

In that AIRMAN FIRST CLASS JASON PATRICK APPELDORN, United States Air Force, 90th Transportation Squadron, did, at or near Francis E. Warren Air Force Base, Wyoming, on divers occasions between on or about 1 July 2000 and on or about 31 August 2000, knowingly receive twenty-two computer images of child pornography that were transported in interstate commerce, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, § 2252(a)(2)(A).

 

In that AIRMAN FIRST CLASS JASON PATRICK APPELDORN, United States Air Force, 90th Transportation Squadron, did, at or near Francis E. Warren Air Force Base, Wyoming, on or about 4 January 2001, knowingly possess nineteen pages of printed computer images of child pornography that were transported in interstate commerce, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, § 2252(a)(5)(B).

 

 

     The decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed as to the Charge and its specifications as amended, as well as to the sentence.  [See also ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW this date.]

 

No. 04-0188/AF.  U.S. v. Daniel W. HONZIK.  CCA 34667.  On consideration of Appellant’s petition for grant of review, and in light of this Court’s decision in United States v. O’Connor, 58 M.J. 450 (C.A.A.F. 2003), said petition is granted on the following issue:

 

WHETHER APPELLANT’S CONVICTION FOR POSSESSING CHILD PORNOGRAPHY UJNDER 18 U.S.C. § 2252A IS VOID BECAUSE APPELLANT CANNOT BE CONVICTED OF POSSESSING IMAGES THAT “APPEAR TO BE” OR “CONVEY THE IMPRESSION OF BEING” MINORS AND BECAUSE THE GOVERNMENT DID NOT PRESENT PROOF BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT THAT THE ALLEGED PERSONS DEPICTED IN THE IMAGES WERE ACTUAL CHILDREN.

 

 

     The decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals as to specification 1 of Charge I and the sentence is reversed, but is affirmed in all other respects.  The finding of guilty of specification 1 of Charge I and the sentence are set aside.  The record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Air Force for remand to the Court of Criminal Appeals.  That court may either dismiss specification 1 of Charge I and reassess the sentence based on the affirmed guilty findings or order a rehearing.  [See also ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW this date.]

 

CRAWFORD, Chief Judge (concurring in part, dissenting in part):  I would affirm the findings of specification 1 of Charge I based on my dissent in United States v. O’Connor, 58 M.J. 450, 455 (C.A.A.F. 2003) (Crawford, C.J. dissenting).  Thus, I would affirm the sentence.

 

ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW

 

No. 02-0065/AF.  U.S. v. Ryan W. DAVIS.  CCA 33877.  [See also APPEALS – SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS this date.]

 

 

No. 02-0233/AF.  U.S. v. Dale P. KEYSER.  CCA 34252.  [See also APPEALS – SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS this date.]

 

 

No. 02-0844/AF.  U.S. v. Jason P. APPELDORN.  CCA 34942.  [See also APPEALS – SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS this date.]

 

 

No. 04-0188/AF.  U.S. v. Daniel W. HONZIK.  CCA 34667.  [See also APPEALS – SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS this date.]

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 04-0777/AR.  U.S. v. Dustin S. NEWLOVE.  CCA 20020536.

No. 04-0778/AR.  U.S. v. Patrick S. McDERMOTT, Jr.  CCA 20020837.

No. 04-0779/AR.  U.S. v. Carl A. HARRIS.  CCA 20031175.

No. 04-0780/AR.  U.S. v. Michael S. SPENCER.  CCA 20031268.

No. 04-0781/NA.  U.S. v. Joshua M. HOWARD.  CCA 200301506.

 


 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 04-234

Friday, September 17, 2004

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED

 

No. 04-0458/AF.  U.S. v. Bradley W. FREDERICK.  CCA S30194.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 04-0768/AF.  U.S. v. Vincent L. COLLINS.  CCA S30247.

No. 04-0769/AF.  U.S. v. Brian P. CLAUSEN.  CCA S30554.

No. 04-0770/AF.  U.S. v. Daniel P. DEAS.  CCA S30488.

No. 04-0771/AF.  U.S. v. Brennan F. DE LOS SANTOS.  CCA 35707.

No. 04-0772/AF.  U.S. v. Sheldon J. ORTA.  CCA S30478.

No. 04-0773/AF.  U.S. v. Earl J. ROBERTS.  CCA S30442.

No. 04-0774/AF.  U.S. v. Miguel A. ROSADO III.  CCA 35418.

No. 04-0775/AF.  U.S. v. Heather N. STEVENS.  CCA S30170.

No. 04-0776/AF.  U.S. v. Christopher L. TRAVIS.  CCA S30452.

 

PETITIONS FOR NEW TRIAL DENIED

 

No. 01-0664/AR.  U.S. v. Dennis P. COLLINS.  CCA 9900937.  In light of the Court’s decision, 60 M.J. 261 (C.A.A.F. 2004), Appellant’s petition for new trial is denied as moot.

 

MANDATES ISSUED

 

No. 01-0664/AR.  U.S. v. Dennis P. COLLINS.  CCA 9900937.

No. 02-0885/AF.  U.S. v. Stephanie R. TRAUM.  CCA 34225.

No. 97-0299/NA.  U.S. v. Jorge L. RODRIGUEZ.  CCA 95-0776.

 


 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 04-233

Thursday, September 16, 2004

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED

 

No. 04-0402/MC.  U.S. v. Ryan P. MCALISTER.  CCA 200102096.

No. 04-0542/MC.  U.S. v. Christian M. STERLING.  CCA 200000518.

No. 04-0571/AF.  U.S. v. Casey R. JACKS.  CCA 35745.

No. 04-0581/AR.  U.S. v. Raymond RAINEY Jr.  CCA 20021259.

No. 04-0589/AR.  U.S. v. Brad S. BISIKIRSKI.  CCA 20020810.

No. 04-0613/AR.  U.S. v. Virgil J. STEWART II.  CCA 20040072.

No. 04-0616/NA.  U.S. v. Tyrone L. DICKS.  CCA 200101567.

No. 04-0619/MC.  U.S. v. Jeramy L. KELLEY.  CCA 200301983.

No. 04-0626/NA.  U.S. v. Adolfo H. TOLEDO.  CCA 200201141.

No. 04-0633/NA.  U.S. v. Terry W. CAPERS.  CCA 200301714.

No. 04-0634/NA.  U.S. v. Leo A. HEUSER.  CCA 200301882.

No. 04-0643/NA.  U.S. v. Frederick J. SMITH.  CCA 200301651.

No. 04-0644/NA.  U.S. v. Joshua N. WARREN.  CCA 200300981.

No. 04-0648/AR.  U.S. v. Patrick G. MCAVOY.  CCA 20031288.

No. 04-0661/AR.  U.S. v. Andrew R. IRELAND.  CCA 20040028.

No. 04-0663/MC.  U.S. v. James E. WOODS.  CCA 200202323.

No. 04-0686/AR.  U.S. v. Christopher J. HARRIS.  CCA 20040402.

No. 04-0709/AR.  U.S. v. Michael H. BROWN.  CCA 20030021.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 04-0765/AR.  U.S. v. John P. DAUM.  CCA 20010683.

No. 04-0766/AR.  U.S. v. Quantesa R. DAVIS.  CCA 20030790.

No. 04-0767/AR.  U.S. v. Cleveland WILCOX.  CCA 20040273.



 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 04-232

Wednesday, September 15, 2004


ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW

 

No. 04-5005/NA.  U.S. v. Todd R. FORBES.  CCA 9901454.  Review granted on the following modified issue:

 

WHETHER THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS ERRED IN ADDRESSING THE ISSUE OF FACTUAL AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY OF THE EVIDENCE IN LIGHT OF ITS DECISION TO REVERSE ON AN INSTRUCTIONAL ERROR TO THE MEMBERS.

 

     It is further ordered by the Court that the hearing notice dated July 21, 2004, setting this case for oral argument is hereby vacated.  The case will be set for oral argument at a later date.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED

 

No. 04-0286/AR.  U.S. v. Robert M. HOWARD-PINSON.  CCA 20010413.

No. 04-0345/AF.  U.S. v. Christopher J. SENTANCE.  CCA 34693.

No. 04-0492/AF.  U.S. v. Dennis C. CUFFIA.  CCA S30177.

No. 04-0528/AF.  U.S. v. Brian C. CROCKETT.  CCA 35268.

No. 04-0565/MC.  U.S. v. Gary D. BURCHETT.  CCA 200200121.

No. 04-0596/AF.  U.S. v. Roberto L. OLIVARES.  CCA S30545.

No. 04-0605/MC.  U.S. v. James R. ISSENNOCK.  CCA 200302006.

No. 04-0617/NA.  U.S. v. Ismael RIOS.  CCA 200300887.

No. 04-0621/NA.  U.S. v. William E. CARMICHAEL.  CCA 9901271.

No. 04-0631/MC.  U.S. v. Karon BROWN.  CCA 200301675.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW - OTHER SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS

 

No. 04-0502/AR.  U.S. v. Tommie M. MARTIN.  CCA 9400504.  Appellee’s motion to dismiss the petition for grant of review granted.

 

No. 04-0710/NA.  U.S. v. Christopher A. YARBROUGH.  CCA 200200720.  Appellant’s motion to withdraw the petition for grant of review granted.

 

No. 04-0712/MC.  U.S. v. Ruben B. CASTRO.  CCA 200400485.  Appellant’s motion to withdraw the petition for grant of review granted.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 04-0762/AR.  U.S. v. Brian P. WAGNER.  CCA 20030990.

No. 04-0763/AF.  U.S. v. David T. KEITH.  CCA 35204.

No. 04-0764/MC.  U.S. v. Brian C. DONNELLY.  CCA 200301132.

 

MISCELLANEOUS DOCKET - SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS

 

Misc. No. 04-8028/NA.  Peter T. COSBY, Petitioner, v. United States, Respondent.  CCA 9901704.  Petition for extraordinary relief is denied without prejudice to Petitioner’s right to raise the matter asserted in the petition during the course of normal appellate review.

 

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

 

No. 02-0060/MC.  U.S. v. Anthony L. JONES.  CCA 200100066.  Appellee's motion to extend time to file an answer to final brief granted up to and including October 15, 2004; and absent extraordinary circumstances, no further extension of time will be granted in this case.

 

No. 04-0250/AR.  U.S. v. Jonathan G. SCALO.  CCA 20020624.  Appellant's motion to attach granted.

 

No. 04-0606/AF.  U.S. v. Alexander L. COHEN.  CCA 34975.  Appellee's motion to attach corrected pages granted; Appellant's motion to attach documents denied in that said documents are already contained in the record of trial.

 

No. 04-0679/AR.  U.S. v. Darlene N. MARTINEZ.  CCA 20040071. Appellant's motion to attach granted.

 

No. 04-0685/AR.  U.S. v. Adam R. COOK.  CCA 20010400.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted to October 15, 2004.

 

No. 04-0700/AF.  U.S. v. Stephen J. LAZAUSKAS.  CCA 34934.  Appellant's motion for leave to file pleading in excess of fifty pages granted.

 

No. 04-5005/NA.  United States, Appellant/Cross-Appellee, v. Todd R. FORBES, Appellee/Cross-Appellant.  CCA 9901454.  Appellant’s motion to file reply brief out of time granted.

 

No. 04-8025/NA.  Wade L. WALKER, Petitioner, v. United States, Respondent.  CCA 9501607.  Petitioner's motion for oral argument is granted.  The Court will hear oral argument on the following issue only:

 

WHETHER UNDER ARTICLE 66(A), UCMJ, THE PANEL REVIEWING THE PETITIONER’S CASE IS PROPERLY ASSIGNED, AND WHETHER THERE CAN BE TWO CHIEF JUDGES OF THE NAVY-MARINCE CORPS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS.

 

     It is further ordered that the above-entitled action be called for hearing at 9:00 a.m. on the 26th day of October, 2004.  Each side will be allotted 30 minutes to present oral argument.

 

No. 04-8025/NA.  Wade L. WALKER, Petitioner, v. United States, Respondent.  CCA 9501607.  Petitioner's motion to attach granted and Petitioner’s opposition to the motion filed by Lieutenant Michael J. Navarre for leave to withdraw as appellate counsel, which this Court construes as a motion for reconsideration of this Court’s order dated September 1, 2004, denied.  Petitioner’s opposition to the motion to withdraw does not contradict the express assertion of Lieutenant Navarre that provisions have been made for the continued representation of Petitioner.  See United States v. Gray, 39 M.J. 351 (C.M.A. 1993) (order).

 



UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 04-231

Tuesday, September 14, 2004

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED

 

No. 04-0483/AR.  U.S. v. Andrew L. DAUGHERTY.  CCA 20030930.

No. 04-0489/AR.  U.S. v. Everette J. HARMON.  CCA 20010697.

No. 04-0551/AR.  U.S. v. Edward D. HOWARD.  CCA 20010787.

No. 04-0573/AF.  U.S. v. Thomas P. HAN.  CCA 35697.

No. 04-0595/AF.  U.S. v. Jake P. PACE.  CCA S30518.

No. 04-0618/NA.  U.S. v. Roland R. DUKE.  CCA 200301488.

No. 04-0620/NA.  U.S. v. Jeremy B. COLLINS.  CCA 200300809.

No. 04-0622/AF.  U.S. v. Jeffrey L. BEAGLE.  CCA 35690.

No. 04-0624/AF.  U.S. v. Tristan C. RAND.  CCA S30255.

No. 04-0627/MC.  U.S. v. Gregory J. LENTSCH.  CCA 200300275.

No. 04-0629/NA.  U.S. v. Roger S. PORT.  CCA 200300817.

No. 04-0636/NA.  U.S. v. Zaymen D. OWENS.  CCA 200201554.

No. 04-0671/AR.  U.S. v. Oliver W. RAWLS.  CCA 20040034.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 04-0761/NA.  U.S. v. Heath E. JUHNKE.  CCA 200200172.

 



UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 04-230

Monday, September 13, 2004


APPEALS - SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS

 

No. 98-0783/NA.  U.S. v. Michael W. FRICKE.  CCA 199601293.  On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals, said petition 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. 98-0783/NA.  U.S. v. Michael W. FRICKE.  CCA 199601293.  [See also APPEALS – SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS this date.]

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED

 

No. 04-0317/CG.  U.S. v. Nicole R. MCAULEY.  CCA 1177.

No. 04-0396/AF.  U.S. v. Christopher D. CHASE.  CCA 35404.

No. 04-0479/AF.  U.S. v. Benjamin J. WRIGHT.  CCA 35170.

No. 04-0507/AF.  U.S. v. Clifton JORDAN.  CCA 35396.

No. 04-0543/AR.  U.S. v. Marvin JACOBS.  CCA 20021099.

No. 04-0561/AR.  U.S. v. James K. STEWART.  CCA 20031309.

No. 04-0570/AF.  U.S. v. Aaron Y. SHIN.  CCA 35722.

No. 04-0579/CG.  U.S. v. Lewis A. GARCIA.  CCA 1195.

No. 04-0585/AR.  U.S. v. Nickolaus C. DREGHORN.  CCA 20031058.

No. 04-0603/MC.  U.S. v. Jose R. ORTIZ.  CCA 200302020.

No. 04-0642/NA.  U.S. v. Yibeltal N. WORKINEH.  CCA 200301839.

No. 04-0650/MC.  U.S. v. Patrick D. BLACK.  CCA 200301734.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 04-0758/AR.  U.S. v. Ricky G. THOMAS.  CCA 20040388.

No. 04-0759/AR.  U.S. v. Larry S. JONES.  CCA 20030358.

No. 04-0760/AF.  U.S. v. Shane G. NORWOOD I.  CCA 35734.

 


 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 04-229

Friday, September 10, 2004

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 04-0751/AF.  U.S. v. Michael D. BOUCHILLON.  CCA 34910.

No. 04-0752/AF.  U.S. v. Brooks S. DEBOER.  CCA S30271.

No. 04-0753/AF.  U.S. v. Samuel Z. SAVRA.  CCA S30493.

No. 04-0754/MC.  U.S. v. Jorge J. ADRIAZOLA.  CCA 200301990.

No. 04-0755/MC.  U.S. v. Eric WAITIKI.  CCA 200301887.

No. 04-0756/MC.  U.S. v. David E. FISCHER.  CCA 200200303.

No. 04-0757/NA.  U.S. v. Benjamin L. ROBBINS.  CCA 200300073.

 

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

 

No. 02-0443/AR.  U.S. v. Scott D. GIBSON.  CCA 9900573.  Appellant's second motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted up to and including September 30, 2004; and absent extraordinary circumstances, no further extension of time will be granted in this case.

 

No. 04-0218/MC.  U.S. v. Paul A. RICHARDSON.  CCA 200101917.  Appellant's motion to correct errata granted.

 

No. 04-0533/AF.  U.S. v. Kenneth J. BETTS, I.  CCA 35218.  Appellant's motion to file corrected pleading out of time granted.

 

No. 04-8018/AR.  U.S. v. Gary DICKSON.  CCA 20040032.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file a final brief granted up to and including September 29, 2004; and absent extraordinary circumstances, no further extension of time will be granted in this case.

 



UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 04-228

Thursday, September 09, 2004

 

APPEALS - SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS

 

No. 01-0786/AF.  U.S. v. Manuel MARMOLEJO.  CCA 33950.  On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals, said petition is granted and the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed.  The six-month waiver of mandatory forfeitures will commence on the date of the initial convening authority’s action, January 6, 2000, as opposed to the date of the subsequent action, December 3, 2003.  [See also ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW this date.]

 

No. 03-0092/AR.  U.S. v. Daniel C. HAGUE-CAMPBELL.  CCA 20000735.  On further consideration of the issues granted review by this Court on March 19, 2003, 58 M.J. 209-10 (C.A.A.F. 2003), and in light of this Court’s decisions in United States v. Mason, 60 M.J. 15 (C.A.A.F. 2004) and United States v. O’Connor, 58 M.J. 450 (C.A.A.F. 2003), it is ordered that the specification of Charge I is amended to read as follows:

 

In that Private First Class Daniel C. Hague-Campbell, U.S. Army, Headquarters Company, United States Army Garrison, Ft. Wainwright, Alaska, did at Fort Wainwright, Alaska knowingly receive and distribute child pornography that has been mailed, or shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce by means of a computer on divers occasions between 1 October 1999 and 31 March 2000 in violation of Title 18, United States Code, § 2252(a)(2)(A).

 

     The decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed as to Charge I and its specification as amended, as well as to the remaining charge and its specification and the sentence.

 

No. 03-0441/NA.  U.S. v. Jeremy ESCOLAR.  CCA 200001531.  On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals, and in light of this Court’s decision in United States v. O’Connor, 58 M.J. 450 (C.A.A.F. 2003), we note Appellant pled guilty to specification 2 of the Charge that alleged a violation of Section 2252A of Title 18, United States Code, portions of which were subsequently declared unconstitutional in Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition, 535 U.S. 234 (2002).  The military judge’s plea inquiry

made no reference to those portions, however, and focused Appellant on the portions of the statute subsequently held to be constitutional.  Appellant’s responses were directed toward the portions of the statute subsequently held to be constitutional, and there is no substantial basis in law and fact for questioning the providence of his guilty plea.  O’Connor, 58 M.J. at 454.  Accordingly, said petition 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.]

 

No. 03-0467/AR.  U.S. v. John D. TYNES.  CCA 9901093.  On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals, and in light of this Court’s decision in United States v. O’Connor, 58 M.J. 450 (C.A.A.F. 2003), said petition is granted on the following issue:

 

WHETHER THE ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS ERRED IN UPHOLDING APPELLANT'S CONVICTION UNDER THE CHILD PORNOGRAPHY PREVENTION ACT, 18 U.S.C. § 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 (2003).

 

     The decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals as to specifications 7 and 8 of Charge II and the sentence is reversed, but is affirmed in all other respects.

 

     The findings of guilty of specifications 7 and 8 of Charge II and the sentence are set aside.  The record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Army for remand to the Court of Criminal Appeals.  That Court may either dismiss specifications 7 and 8 of Charge II and reassess the sentence based on the affirmed guilty findings or order a rehearing.  [See also ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW this date.]

 

CRAWFORD, Chief Judge (concurring in part and dissenting in part):  I would affirm the findings of specifications 7 and 8 of Charge II based on my dissent in United States v. O’Connor, 58 M.J. 450, 455-59 (C.A.A.F. 2003).  Thus, I would also affirm the sentence.

 

No. 04-0157/AF.  U.S. v. Frank SANCHEZ Jr.  CCA 34940.  On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals, and in light of this Court’s decision in United States v. O’Connor, 58 M.J. 450 (C.A.A.F. 2003), said petition is granted on the following issue:

 

WHETHER APPELLANT'S CONVICTION FOR POSSESSING CHILD PORNOGRAPHY IN VIOLATION OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 2252A(a)(5)(A), MUST BE SET ASIDE IN LIGHT OF THE SUPREME COURT'S DECISION IN ASHCROFT v. FREE SPEECH COALITION.

 

     The decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals as to the Additional Charge and its specification and the sentence is reversed, but is affirmed in all other respects.  The finding of guilty of the Additional Charge and its specification and the sentence are set aside.  The record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Air Force for remand to the Court of Criminal Appeals.  That Court may either dismiss the Additional Charge and its specification and reassess the sentence based on the affirmed guilty findings or order a rehearing.  [See also ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW this date.]

 

CRAWFORD, Chief Judge (concurring in part and dissenting in part):  I would affirm the Additional Charge and its specification based on my dissent in United States v. O’Connor, 58 M.J. 450, 455-59 (C.A.A.F. 2003).  Thus, I would also affirm the sentence.

 

No. 04-0226/AF.  U.S. v. Jay C. JENSEN.  CCA 35164.  On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals, and in light of this Court’s decisions in United States v. Mason, 60 M.J. 15 (C.A.A.F. 2004) and United States v. O’Connor, 58 M.J. 450 (C.A.A.F. 2003), said petition is granted on the following issue:

 

WHETHER APPELLANT'S PLEA OF GUILTY TO AN OFFENSE UNDER 18 U.S.C. § 2252A WAS INVOLUNTARY BECAUSE HE HAD AN INCOMPLETE UNDERSTANDING OF THE OFFENSE WHEN THE MILITARY JUDGE EXPLAINED THE OFFENSE USING THE UNCONSTITUTIONALLY VAGUE AND OVERBROAD DEFINITIONS OF CHILD PORNOGRAPHY CONTAINED IN 18 U.S.C. § 2256.

 

     Specification 9 of Charge II is amended to read as follows:

 

In that TECHNICAL SERGEANT JAY C. JENSEN, United States Air Force, 319th Aircraft Generation Squadron, did, within the continental United States, on divers occasions, between on or about 20 August 1997 and on or about 2 April 2001, knowingly possess materials that contained an image of child pornography; that was mailed, shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce by any means, including computer, or were produced using materials mailed, shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce by any means, including computer, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, § 2252A(a)(5)(B).

 

     The decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed as to Charge II and Specification 9 as amended, as well as to the remaining charges and their specifications and the sentence.  [See also ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW this date.]

 

No. 04-0261/AF.  U.S. v. Michael C. BUTLER.  CCA 35472.  On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals, and in light of this Court’s decisions in United States v. Irvin, 60 M.J. 23 (C.A.A.F. 2004) and United States v. O’Connor, 58 M.J. 450 (C.A.A.F. 2003), said petition is granted and the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed.  [See also ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW this date.]

 

ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW

 

No. 01-0786/AF.  U.S. v. Manuel MARMOLEJO.  CCA 33950.  [See also APPEALS – SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS this date.]

 

No. 03-0441/NA.  U.S. v. Jeremy ESCOLAR.  CCA 200001531.  [See also APPEALS – SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS this date.]

 

No. 03-0467/AR.  U.S. v. John D. TYNES.  CCA 9901093.  [See also APPEALS – SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS this date.]

 

No. 04-0157/AF.  U.S. v. Frank SANCHEZ Jr.  CCA 34940.  [See also APPEALS – SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS this date.]

 

No. 04-0226/AF.  U.S. v. Jay C. JENSEN.  CCA 35164.  [See also APPEALS – SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS this date.]

 

No. 04-0261/AF.  U.S. v. Michael C. BUTLER.  CCA 35472.  [See also APPEALS – SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS this date.]

 

No. 04-0540/AF.  U.S. v. Michael A. BARRIER.  CCA S30160.  Review granted on the following issue:

 

WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE ERRED TO THE SUBSTANTIAL PREJUDICE OF THE APPELLANT WHEN, OVER DEFENSE OBJECTION, HE GAVE THE “FRIEDMANN INSTRUCTION.”

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED

 

No. 04-0228/AF.  U.S. v. Kenneth J. BETTS.  CCA 35288.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 04-0749/MC.  U.S. v. Keenan J. LAWRENCE.  CCA 200400338.

No. 04-0750/NA.  U.S. v. Christian R. CASTILLO.  CCA 200400091.

 

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

 

No. 01-0786/AF.  U.S. v. Manuel MARMOLEJO.  CCA 33950.  Appellant's motion to attach documents denied.

 

No. 04-0600/AR.  U.S. v. Jason E. RUDIN.  CCA 20031287.  Appellee's motion for leave to file brief and Appellant's motion for leave to file corrected page are granted.

 

MANDATES ISSUED

 

No. 03-0692/AF.  U.S. v. Gary W. TAYLOR Jr.  CCA 34852.

No. 03-6003/NA.  U.S. v. Rico S. GORE.  CCA 200300348.

 


 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 04-227

Wednesday, September 08, 2004


PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 04-0745/AR.  U.S. v. Nicole S. FORTUNE.  CCA 20020843.

No. 04-0746/NA.  U.S. v. Matt L. MCGINNIS.  CCA 200300116.

No. 04-0747/NA.  U.S. v. Paul F. CASTANEDA.  CCA 200301089.

No. 04-0748/MC.  U.S. v. Luis M. CASTRO.  CCA 200300379.

 

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

 

No. 04-0178/AR.  U.S. v. Jacques SAINTAUDE, Jr.  CCA 9801647.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file final brief granted to October 12, 2004.

 

No. 04-0662/MC.  U.S. v. Michael J. YUNGEN.  CCA 200301752.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted to October 7, 2004.

 

No. 04-0707/MC.  U.S. v. Joshua J. PRATCHARD.  CCA 200301258.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted to October 22, 2004.

 

No. 04-5004/AR.  United States, Appellant, v. Charles E. SINGLETON, Appellee.  CCA 20010376.  Appellant's motion to attach granted.

 

No. 04-8025/NA.  Wade L. WALKER, Petitioner, v. United States, Respondent.  CCA 9501607.  Petitioner's motion to remove Clyde J. Villemez as a respondent to Petitioner's petition for extraordinary relief granted.




 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 04-226

Tuesday, September 07, 2004

 

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 04-0735/AR.  U.S. v. Rodney GRIFFIN, Jr.  CCA 20030984.

No. 04-0736/AR.  U.S. v. James M. BLAIR.  CCA 20030349.

No. 04-0737/AR.  U.S. v. Jerome R. EWING.  CCA 20030259.

No. 04-0738/AR.  U.S. v. Scott G. BURNETT.  CCA 20030094.

No. 04-0739/AF.  U.S. v. Christopher B. SHINGLETON.  CCA 35865.

No. 04-0740/AF.  U.S. v. Anna E. BELLAMY.  CCA S30549.

No. 04-0741/MC.  U.S. v. Clayton J. McALEES.  CCA 200301664.

No. 04-0742/MC.  U.S. v. Brandon L. HANSON.  CCA 200300269.

No. 04-0743/NA.  U.S. v. Clevon R. MAYE.  CCA 200302035.

No. 04-0744/MC.  U.S. v. Jorge L. CANDANOZA.  CCA 200400280.




 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 04-225

Friday, September 03, 2004

 

APPEALS - SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS

 

No. 04-0431/AF.  U.S. v. David T. WILSON.  CCA S30467.  On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals, said petition is hereby granted and the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed as to findings and only so much of the sentence as provides for a bad-conduct discharge, confinement for 6 months, forfeiture of $767.00 pay per month for 6 months, and reduction to E-1.  [See also ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW this date.]

 

ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW

 

No. 04-0431/AF.  U.S. v. David T. WILSON.  CCA S30467.  [See also APPEALS – SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS this date.]

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 04-0733/MC.  U.S. v. Richard J. HARMS.  CCA 200400301.

No. 04-0734/NA.  U.S. v. Thomas J. SMITH.  CCA 200201003.

 



 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 04-224

Thursday, September 02, 2004


ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW

 

No. 03-0568/AR.  U.S. v. Jacqueline BILLINGS.  CCA 9900122.  Review granted on the following issue:

 

WHETHER THE UNITED STATES ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE MILITARY JUDGE'S DECISION TO (1) ACCEPT A JEWELER CALLED BY THE GOVERNMENT AS AN EXPERT IN "CARTIER WATCH IDENTIFICATION;" (2) ALLOW THAT JEWELER TO IDENTIFY A WATCH IN A PICTURE AS SOLID GOLD (RATHER THAN GOLD PLATE); AND (3) ALLOW THAT JEWELER TO TESTIFY THAT THE WATCH IN ONE PICTURE IS THE SAME STYLE AS THE WATCH IN A DIFFERENT PICTURE.

 

No. 04-0465/AF.  U.S. v. Terry A. FLETCHER.  CCA 34945.  Review granted on the following issue:

 

WHETHER THE CIRCUIT TRIAL COUNSEL'S FINDINGS ARGUMENT WAS IMPROPER AND MATERIALLY PREJUDICED APPELLANT'S SUBSTANTIAL RIGHTS.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED

 

No. 04-0498/AF.  U.S. v. David C. KOVAL.  CCA S30463.

No. 04-0537/AR.  U.S. v. Cleophus JACKSON.  CCA 20020793.

No. 04-0568/AR.  U.S. v. Justin L. HANCOCK.  CCA 20031107.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 04-0729/AR.  U.S. v. Pedro S. RAMIREZ.  CCA 20021445.

No. 04-0730/AF.  U.S. v. Kenneth W. ALLISON.  CCA 35714.

No. 04-0731/AF.  U.S. v. Christopher M. ROGERS.  CCA 35716.

No. 04-0732/NA.  U.S. v. Ernest A. CASTENEDA.  CCA 200400141.

 

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

 

No. 03-0568/AR.  U.S. v. Jacqueline BILLINGS.  CCA 9900122.  Appellant's motion for leave to file additional matters pursuant to U.S. v. Grostefon, 12 M.J. 431 (C.M.A. 1982), denied.

 


 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 04-223

Wednesday, September 01, 2004


PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 04-0727/AR.  U.S. v. Tylus M. ROGERS.  CCA 20030223.

No. 04-0728/AR.  U.S. v. Joel M. DELA CIRNA.  CCA 20030338.

 

PETITIONS FOR RECONSIDERATION DENIED

 

No. 04-0381/AR.  U.S. v. Cedric L. AARON.  CCA 20000747.  Appellant’s petition for reconsideration of the order of the Court issued on July 23, 2004, denied.

 

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

 

No. 04-0591/NA.  U.S. v. E' Randal K. WILLIS.  CCA 200200842.  Motion of appellate defense counsel to withdraw and notice of appearance of new counsel granted.

 

No. 04-8025/NA.  Wade L. WALKER, Petitioner, v. United States, Respondents.  CCA 9501607.  Motion of appellate defense counsel to withdraw and notice of appearance of new counsel granted.

 


Home Page |  Opinions & Digest  |  Daily Journal  |  Scheduled Hearings  |  Search Site