UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
No. 12-181
Thursday, May 31, 2012
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF
REVIEW FILED
No. 12-0534/MC.
PETITIONS FOR
RECONSIDERATION DENIED
No. 11-0525/AF.
Michael P. GRAFMULLER, Appellant v.
MANDATES ISSUED
No. 12-0202/NA.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
No. 12-180
Wednesday, May 30, 2012
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF
REVIEW DENIED
No. 12-0461/AR.
No. 12-0462/AR.
No. 12-0463/AR.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF
REVIEW FILED
No. 12-0531/AR.
No. 12-0532/AR.
No. 12-0533/AR.
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No. 12-0028/AR.
No. 12-0486/AR.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR
THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
No. 12-179
Tuesday, May 29, 2012
CERTIFICATE
FOR REVIEW FILED
No. 12-5002/AF.
I. WHETHER THE AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL
APPEALS ERRED BY HOLDING THAT APPELLEE WAS NOT AFFORDED A FUNDAMENTALLY FAIR
TRIAL, AS GUARANTEED BY MILITARY DUE PROCESS AND THE UCMJ, WHEN TWO REPLACEMENT
COURT MEMBERS DETAILED AFTER TRIAL ON THE MERITS HAD BEGUN WERE PRESENTED
RECORDED EVIDENCE PREVIOUSLY INTRODUCED BEFORE THE MEMBERS OF THE COURT IN
COMPLIANCE WITH ARTICLE 29, UCMJ, AND R.C.M. 805(d)(1).
II. WHETHER THE AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL
APPEALS ERRED BY FAILING TO FIND WAIVER OR BY FAILING TO CONDUCT A PLAIN ERROR
ANALYSIS; INSTEAD, THE COURT INCONGRUOUSLY FOUND THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF
APPELLEE'S RIGHT TO MILITARY DUE PROCESS WAS PER SE PREJUDICIAL DESPITE
DECLARING THAT THE ERROR WAS NOT STRUCTURAL.
PETITIONS
FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No. 12-0028/AR.
No. 12-0526/AR.
No. 12-0527/AR.
No. 12-0528/AR.
No. 12-0529/AR.
No. 12-0530/AR.
_______________________________
* Second
petition filed in this case.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
No. 12-178
Friday, May 25, 2012
PETITIONS
FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED
No. 11-0595/NA. U.S.
v. William C. FAIRLEY. CCA 200900574.
No. 11-0642/AF. U.S.
v. Daniel W. DREWS. CCA 37727.
No. 12-0454/AR. U.S.
v. Matthew D. HOWARD. CCA 20090079.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF
REVIEW FILED
No. 12-0522/AF. U.S.
v. Adam G. COTE. CCA 37745.
No. 12-0523/AR. U.S.
v. Brandon T. WEAVER. CCA 20090397.
No. 12-0524/AR. U.S.
v. Bruce L. KELLY. CCA 20090809.
No. 12-0525/AR. U.S.
v. Michael A. SOUSA. CCA 20100952.
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No. 12-0300/AR. U.S.
v. Payson C. AVERILL. CCA 20090491. Appellee's motion to file a supplemental joint
appendix is granted.
No. 12-0467/AF. U.S.
v. Alexander L. KITSON. CCA 37825. Appellant's motion to amend the supplement to
the petition for grant of review is granted.
No. 12-0522/AF. U.S.
v. Adam G. COTE. CCA 37745. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the
supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to June 14, 2012.
No. 12-0524/AR. U.S.
v. Bruce L. KELLY. CCA 20090809. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the
supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to June 13, 2012.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
No. 12-177
Thursday, May 24, 2012
PETITIONS
FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED
No. 12-0441/NA. U.S.
v. George W. WARREN. CCA 201100048.
No. 12-0453/AR. U.S.
v. Jason A. CLEDGETT. CCA 20100780.
No. 12-0456/AR. U.S.
v. Brandyn L. HASNAS. CCA 20110598.
No. 12-0457/AR. U.S.
v. Virgil R. MITCHELL. CCA 20110155.
No. 12-0458/AR. U.S.
v. Samuel J. THOMAS. CCA 20091110.
No. 12-0459/AR. U.S.
v. Colby H. FEAGIN. CCA 20110734.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF
REVIEW FILED
No. 12-0515/AR. U.S.
v. Vincent L. BEARD. CCA 20110298.
No. 12-0516/AF. U.S.
v. Michael S. TUNSTALL. CCA 37592.
No. 12-0517/AR. U.S.
v. Jerrid D. COOK. CCA 20110255.
No. 12-0518/AF. U.S.
v. Frank S. SALAS. CCA S31951.
No. 12-0519/AR. U.S.
v. Tracy E. LAWSON. CCA 20110445.
No. 12-0520/AR. U.S.
v. Michael S. JOSEY. CCA 20110469.
No. 12-0521/AR. U.S.
v. Travis J. LEE. CCA 20110845.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
No. 12-176
Wednesday, May 23, 2012
APPEALS
- SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS
No. 12-0149/AR. U.S. v. Christopher L. STADEL. CCA 20090820.
On further consideration of the granted issue, __ M.J. __ (C.A.A.F.
2012) (order granting review), and in light of United States v. Ignacio,
71 M.J. 125 (C.A.A.F. 2012), and United States v. Medina, 69 M.J. 462
(C.A.A.F. 2011), it is ordered that
the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals is hereby
affirmed.
ORDERS GRANTING PETITION
FOR REVIEW
No. 11-0400/AR. U.S. v. Michael T. MCNAUGHTON. CCA 20090596.
Review granted on the following issue:
WHETHER THE GOVERNMENT'S FAILURE TO
ALLEGE THE TERMINAL ELEMENT OF ARTICLE 134, UCMJ, IN SPECIFICATION 3 OF CHARGE
II REQUIRES THIS COURT TO SET ASIDE THAT CHARGE.
No briefs will be filed under Rule
25.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF
REVIEW FILED
No. 10-0319/MC. U.S.
v. Nathan M. ROBINSON. CCA 208800827.*
No. 11-0497/MC. U.S.
v. Desmond J. HORTON. CCA 201000481.*
No. 12-0512/AR. U.S. v. William R. WEIGOLD III. CCA 20110412.
No. 12-0513/AF. U.S.
v. Guillermo MELENDEZ, Jr. CCA 37954.
No. 12-0514/AF. U.S.
v. Guillermo MELENDEZ, Jr. CCA 38015.
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No. 11-0640/AR. U.S.
v. Robert L. MCCULLOUGH. CCA 20090206. Appellee's motion for leave to file a
supplemental joint appendix is granted.
No. 12-0313/MC. U.S.
v. Andrew D. TEARMAN. CCA 201100195. Appellee's motion to extend time to file a
brief is granted, up to and including
June 6, 2012, and absent
extraordinary circumstances, no further extension of time will be granted in
this case.
No. 12-0510/AR. U.S.
v. Anthony R. BRAGG. CCA 20110132. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the
supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to June 11, 2012.
_____________________________
* Second petition filed in this case.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
No. 12-175
Tuesday, May 22, 2012
ORDERS GRANTING PETITION
FOR REVIEW
No. 10-0572/AF.
WHETHER THE FINDING OF GUILTY TO
INDECENT ASSAULT IN VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 134, UCMJ, FAILS TO STATE AN OFFENSE
IN LIGHT OF UNITED STATES v. FOSLER, 70 M.J. 225 (C.A.A.F. 2011).
No briefs will be filed under Rule
25.
No. 11-0563/MC.
WHETHER THE ADMISSION INTO EVIDENCE
OF THE NAVY DRUG SCREENING LABORATORY URINALYSIS DOCUMENTS VIOLATED APPELLANT'S
SIXTH AMENDMENT RIGHT TO CONFRONT THE WITNESSES AGAINST HIM.
No briefs will be filed under Rule
25.
No. 12-0009/MC.
WHETHER A CONTESTED ARTICLE 134
CLAUSE 1 OR 2 SPECIFICATION THAT FAILS TO EXPRESSLY ALLEGE AN ARTICLE 134
TERMINAL ELEMENT BUT THAT WAS NOT CHALLENGED AT TRIAL STATES AN OFFENSE.
No briefs will be filed under Rule
25.
No. 12-0373/AF.
WHETHER, IN LIGHT OF UNITED
STATES v. FOSLER AND UNITED STATES v. BALLAN, SPECIFICATION 2 OF
CHARGE II FAILS TO STATE AN OFFENSE BECAUSE IT DOES NOT ALLEGE ANY OF THE THREE
TERMINAL CLAUSES UNDER ARTICLE 134.
No briefs will be filed under Rule
25.
No. 12-0418/AF.
II. WHETHER TRIAL COUNSEL'S IMPROPER SENTENCING ARGUMENT AMOUNTED TO
PROSECUTORIAL MISCONDUCT.
II. WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE PREJUDICIALLY
ERRED WHEN HE FAILED TO STOP TRIAL COUNSEL'S IMPROPER SENTENCING ARGUMENT OR
ISSUE A CURATIVE INSTRUCTION.
III. WHETHER TRIAL DEFENSE COUNSEL RENDERED
INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE WHEN HE FAILED TO OBJECT TO TRIAL COUNSEL'S IMPROPER
SENTENCING ARGUMENT.
Briefs will be filed under Rule 25.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF
REVIEW FILED
No. 12-0509/AR.
No. 12-0510/AR.
No. 12-0511/AR.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
No. 12-174
Monday, May 21, 2012
APPEALS
- SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS
No. 11-0361/AR.
* The decision
of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals states that Appellant was
convicted of only two specifications of larceny rather than four.
ORDERS GRANTING PETITION
FOR REVIEW
No. 11-0104/AF.
WHETHER THE SPECIFICATION OF THE
CHARGE FAILS TO STATE AN OFFENSE UNDER ARTICLE 134 AS IT FAILS TO ALLEGE THE
THIRD DISTINCTIVE ELEMENT OF ARTICLE 134.
No briefs will be filed under Rule
25.
No. 11-0361/AR.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF
REVIEW DENIED
No. 11-0481/AF.
No. 11-0529/AF.
No. 11-0607/AF.
No. 11-0617/AF.
No. 12-0360/MC.
No. 12-0427/AR.
No. 12-0442/AF.
No. 12-0445/AF.
No. 12-0446/AF.
No. 12-0471/AR.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF
REVIEW FILED
No. 12-0504/AR.
No. 12-0505/AR.
No. 12-0506/AR.
No. 12-0507/AR.
No. 12-0508/NA.
PETITION FOR
RECONSIDERATION DENIED
No. 12-8015/NA. James
Melvin LEWIS, Petitioner v.
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No. 12-0477/AR.
No. 12-0478/AR.
No. 12-0501/AF.
No. 12-0503/AF.
No. 12-0504/AR.
No. 12-0505/AR.
MANDATES ISSUED
No. 12-6001/AF.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
No. 12-173
Friday, May 18, 2012
ORDERS
GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW
No. 12-0414/AR.
WHETHER THE EVIDENCE IS LEGALLY
SUFFICIENT TO SUPPORT THE FINDINGS OF GUILTY OF MAKING FALSE OFFICIAL
STATEMENTS UNDER CHARGE I.
Briefs will be filed under Rule 25.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF
REVIEW DENIED
No. 11-0494/AF.
No. 12-0443/AF.
No. 12-0444/AF.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF
REVIEW FILED
No. 12-0497/AR.
No. 12-0498/AR.
No. 12-0499/AF.
No. 12-0500/AR.
No. 12-0501/AF.
No. 12-0502/AF.
No. 12-0503/AF.
MANDATES ISSUED
No. 12-0090/AF.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
No. 12-172
Thursday, May 17, 2012
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF
REVIEW FILED
No. 12-0495/AR.
No. 12-0496/NA.
PETITIONS FOR
RECONSIDERATION DENIED
No. 12-6002/AF.
*
Erroneously captioned as "Article 62 appeal."
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No. 12-0149/AR.
No. 12-0245/AR.
No. 12-0354/NA.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
No. 12-171
Wednesday, May 16, 2012
HEARINGS
No. 12-0172/NA.
No. 11-0515/MC.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF
REVIEW FILED
No. 12-0494/AR.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
No. 12-170
Tuesday, May 15, 2012
HEARINGS
No. 12-0194/AR.
No. 12-0251/AF.
ORDERS GRANTING PETITION
FOR REVIEW
No. 11-0257/MC.
WHETHER THE FAILURE TO STATE THE
TERMINAL ELEMENT IN THE ARTICLE 134 SPECIFICATION HERE MATERIALLY PREJUDICED APPELLANT'S
RIGHT TO FAIR NOTICE IN THIS CONTESTED CASE.
No briefs will be filed under Rule
25.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF
REVIEW DENIED
No. 12-0432/AR.
No. 12-0435/AR.
No. 12-0436/AR.
No. 12-0437/AR.
No. 12-0438/AR.
No. 12-0440/AR.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF
REVIEW FILED
No. 12-0492/AR.
No. 12-0493/AR.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
No. 12-169
Monday, May 14, 2012
ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR
REVIEW
No. 12-0385/AR.
WHEN THE GOVERNMENT FAILS TO ALLEGE
AN ARTICLE 134 TERMINAL ELEMENT, THE CHARGE FAILS TO STATE AN OFFENSE UNLESS
THE TERMINAL ELEMENT CAN BE "NECESSARILY IMPLIED" FROM THE LANGUAGE
OF THE SPECIFICATION. THE MISSING
TERMINAL ELEMENT FROM THE SPECIFICATION OF CHARGE III CANNOT BE NECESSARILY
IMPLIED FROM THE TEXT. IS THE CHARGE FATALLY DEFECTIVE?
No briefs will be filed under Rule
25.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF
REVIEW DENIED
No. 12-0371/AR.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF
REVIEW FILED
No. 12-0490/AF.
No. 12-0491/AR.
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No. 12-0282/AR.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
No. 12-168
Friday, May 11, 2012
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF
REVIEW DENIED
No. 11-0165/AF.
No. 11-0565/NA.
No. 11-0637/AF.
No. 12-0365/AR.
No. 12-0420/AR.
No. 12-0422/AR.
No. 12-0431/AF.
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No. 12-0371/AR.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
No. 12-167
Thursday, May 10, 2012
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF
REVIEW FILED
No. 12-0488/AR.
No. 12-0489/AR.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
No. 12-166
Wednesday, May 9, 2012
ORDERS GRANTING PETITION
FOR REVIEW
No. 12-0328/AR.
WHETHER THE CHARGE AND ITS
SPECIFICATIONS FAIL TO STATE AN OFFENSE BECAUSE THE SPECIFICATIONS DO NOT
ALLEGE, EXPRESSLY OR BY NECESSARY IMPLICATION THE "TERMINAL ELEMENT"
AS REQUIRED BY UNITED STATES v. FOSLER, 70 M.J. 225 (C.A.A.F. 2011).
No briefs will be filed under Rule
25.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF
REVIEW DENIED
No. 12-0329/MC.
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No. 11-0558/AR.
No. 11-0565/NA.
No. 12-0206/AR.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
No. 12-165
Tuesday, May 8, 2012
APPEALS - SUMMARY
DISPOSITIONS
No.11-0559/NA.
No. 12-0395/AR.
WHETHER APPELLANT'S TRIAL DEFENSE
COUNSEL'S CONFLICT OF INTEREST, STEMMING FROM A POST-TRIAL INEFFECTIVE
ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL ALLEGATION, ADVERSELY AFFECTED THAT SAME TRIAL DEFENSE
COUNSEL'S CONTINUING REPRESENTATION OF APPELLANT.
The decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal
Appeals is reversed, and the convening authority's action is set aside. The record of trial is returned to the Judge
Advocate General of the Army for submission to an appropriate convening
authority for a new recommendation and action.
See
No. 12-0413/AR.
* It is ordered
that Appellant receive 3 additional days of pretrial confinement credit, for a
total credit of 51 days, against the confinement portion of his sentence.
ORDERS GRANTING PETITION
FOR REVIEW
No. 12-0377/AR.
WHETHER A CONTESTED UNLAWFUL ENTRY
SPECIFICATION THAT FAILS TO EXPRESSLY ALLEGE AN ARTICLE 134 TERMINAL ELEMENT
BUT THAT WAS NOT CHALLENGED AT TRIAL STATES AN OFFENSE.
No briefs will be filed under Rule
25.
No. 12-0395/AR.
No. 12-0413/AR.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF
REVIEW DENIED
No. 12-0375/MC.
No. 12-0429/AF.
No. 12-0430/AF.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF
REVIEW FILED
No. 12-0485/AR.
No. 12-0486/AR.
No. 12-0487/NA.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
No. 12-164
Monday, May 7, 2012
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF
REVIEW FILED
No. 12-0483/AF.
No. 12-0484/NA.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
No. 12-163
Friday, May 4, 2012
ORDERS GRANTING PETITION
FOR REVIEW
No. 11-0626/AR.
WHETHER THE GOVERNMENT'S FAILURE TO
ALLEGE IN SPECIFICATION 1 OF CHARGE VI THAT APPELLANT'S INDECENT ACTS WERE
PREJUDICIAL TO GOOD ORDER AND DISCIPLINE OR SERVICE DISCREDITING UNDER ARTICLE
134, UCMJ, SUBSTANTIALLY PREJUDICED APPELLANT'S CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO FAIR
NOTICE OF THE CHARGE AGAINST HIM.
No briefs will be filed under Rule
25.
No. 12-0320/AF.
I. WHETHER THE LOWER COURT MISAPPLIED UNITED
STATES v. FOSLER AND UNITED STATES v. WATKINS IN FINDING
THAT, DESPITE FAILING TO EXPRESSLY ALLEGE THE TERMINAL ELEMENT, THE ARTICLE 134
SPECIFICATION HERE STATES AN OFFENSE.
And the following issue specified by the Court:
II. WHETHER THE EVIDENCE IS LEGALLY SUFFICIENT TO
SUSTAIN APPELLANT'S CONVICTION FOR MAKING A FALSE OFFICIAL STATEMENT, ARTICLE
107, UCMJ, UNDER THIS COURT'S DECISIONS IN UNITED STATES v. TEFFEAU, 58
M.J. 62 (C.A.A.F. 2002), AND UNITED STATES v. DAY, 66 M.J. 172 (C.A.A.F.
2008).
Briefs will be filed under Rule 25
on Issue II only.
No. 12-0331/AR.
WHETHER THE GOVERNMENT'S FAILURE TO
ALLEGE THE TERMINAL ELEMENTS OF ARTICLE 134 OF THE UNIFORM CODE OF MILITARY
JUSTICE IN THE SPECIFICATION OF CHARGE IV AND IN SPECIFICATION 1 OF ADDITIONAL
CHARGE V REQUIRES THIS COURT TO SET ASIDE THOSE SPECIFICATIONS.
No briefs will be filed under Rule
25.
No. 12-0396/MC.
I. TESTIMONIAL STATEMENTS CANNOT BE INTRODUCED
ABSENT CONFRONTATION. HERE, APPELLANT
OBJECTED TO THE CONFIRMATION AND SCREEN/RE-SCREEN WORKSHEETS ON CONFRONTATION
GROUNDS BECAUSE: (1) NDSL'S MISSION IS TO PRODUCE ADMISSIBLE RESULTS; (2) THESE
WORKSHEETS WERE CREATED AFTER APPELLANT'S SAMPLE WAS MARKED PRESUMPTIVELY
POSITIVE; AND (3) THE WORKSHEETS ARE CREATED FOR AN EVIDENTIARY PURPOSE. DID THE LOWER COURT ERR BY HOLDING THAT THE
WORKSHEETS WERE NON-TESTIMONIAL?
II. THE LOWER COURT HELD THAT THE MILITARY JUDGE
DID NOT ABUSE HIS DISCRETION IN ADMITTING, OVER APPELLANT'S OBJECTION ON
CONFRONTATION GROUNDS, THE CHAIN OF CUSTODY DOCUMENTS. ARE THESE NON-MACHINE-GENERATED DOCUMENTS
TESTIMONIAL?
III. THE LOWER COURT HELD THAT THE ERRONEOUS
ADMISSION OF TWO PIECES OF TESTIMONIAL HEARSAY FOUND WITHIN THE SPECIMEN
CUSTODY DOCUMENT WAS HARMLESS BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. BUT IT MISAPPLIED THE SWEENEY FACTORS
AND DID NOT CONSIDER THE BLAZIER II FACTORS IN ASSESSING PREJUDICE. DID THE
No briefs will be filed under Rule
25.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF
REVIEW FILED
No. 12-0475/AF.
No. 12-0476/AF.
No. 12-0477/AR.
No. 12-0478/AR.
No. 12-0479/AF.
No. 12-0480/AR.
No. 12-0481/NA.
No. 12-0482/MC.
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No. 12-0477/AR.
No. 12-0478/AR.
No. 12-0481/NA.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
No. 12-162
Thursday, May 3, 2012
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF
REVIEW DENIED
No. 11-0401/AF.
No. 12-0423/AF.
No. 12-0424/AF.
No. 12-0425/AF.
No. 12-0426/AR.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
No. 12-161
Wednesday, May 2, 2012
PETITION FOR GRANT OF
REVIEW FILED
No. 12-0474/NA.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY JOURNAL
No. 12-160
Tuesday, May 1, 2012
ORDERS GRANTING PETITION
FOR REVIEW
No. 11-0467/AR.
WHETHER THE GOVERNMENT'S FAILURE TO
ALLEGE THE TERMINAL ELEMENT OF ARTICLE 134 OF THE UNIFORM CODE OF MILITARY
JUSTICE IN THE SPECIFICATION OF CHARGE V REQUIRES THIS COURT TO SET ASIDE THAT
SPECIFICATION.
No briefs will be filed under Rule
25.
No. 11-0475/AR.
WHETHER SPECIFICATIONS 2, 6 AND 7,
OF CHARGE III FAIL TO STATE AN OFFENSE BECAUSE THEY DO NOT EXPRESSLY ALLEGE OR
NECESSARILY IMPLY THE TERMINAL ELEMENT OF ARTICLE 134, UCMJ.
No briefs will be filed under Rule
25.
No. 11-0495/AR.
WHEN THE GOVERNMENT FAILS TO ALLEGE
AN ARTICLE 134 TERMINAL ELEMENT, THE CHARGE FAILS TO STATE AN OFFENSE UNLESS
THE TERMINAL ELEMENT CAN BE "NECESSARILY IMPLIED" FROM THE LANGUAGE
OF THE SPECIFICATION. THE MISSING
TERMINAL ELEMENT FROM SPECIFICATION TWO OF CHARGE VI CANNOT BE NECESSARILY
IMPLIED FROM THE TEXT. IS THE CHARGE FATALLY DEFECTIVE?
No briefs will be filed under Rule
25.
No. 12-0286/AF.
WHETHER THE AIR FORCE COURT ERRED BY
FINDING THAT ADDITIONAL CHARGE II ALLEGING UNLAWFUL ENTRY UNDER ARTICLE 134 WAS
NOT DEFICIENT BECAUSE THE "MILITARY JUDGE IS PRESUMED TO KNOW THE LAW AND
APPLY IT CORRECTLY WHEN SITTING AS THE
No briefs will be filed under Rule
25.
No. 12-0317/AF.
WHETHER SPECIFICATIONS 1 AND 5 OF
CHARGE III FAIL TO STATE AN OFFENSE UNDER ARTICLE 134, UCMJ, BECAUSE NEITHER
SPECIFICATION ALLEGES THE TERMINAL ELEMENT.
No briefs will be filed under Rule
25.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF
REVIEW DENIED
No. 12-0411/AR.
No. 12-0412/AR.
No. 12-0415/AF.
No. 12-0416/AR.
No. 12-0417/AF.
No. 12-0421/AR.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF
REVIEW FILED
No. 12-0472/AR.
No. 12-0473/AR.
Home Page
| Opinions & Digest
| Daily
Journal | Scheduled Hearings
| Search Site