UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 14-020

Monday, September 30, 2013

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 14-0086/AF.  U.S. v. Thomas L. EASON.  CCA 38091.

No. 14-0087/AF.  U.S. v. Craig X. JORELL.  CCA 38061.

No. 14-0088/AF.  U.S. v. Robert P. WALLS.  CCA 38078.

 

SPECIAL DOCKET MATTERS

 

No. 14-01.  In the Matter of Michael C. Hickey, Jr.  It appearing that the above-named attorney is a member of the Bar of this Court, that he was suspended indefinitely from the practice of law by the Court of Appeals of Maryland, that pursuant to Rule 15(b), Rules of Practice and Procedure, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, said attorney was suspended from the practice of law before the Court on September 5, 2013, and afforded 30 days to show cause why he should not be disbarred, that said attorney submitted a reply to the order to show cause on September 12, 2013, and upon consideration of the action of the Court of Appeals of Maryland and the reply of said attorney, it is ordered that Michael C. Hickey, Jr., is hereby suspended indefinitely from the practice of law before this Court, effective this date.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 14-019

Friday, September 27, 2013

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED

 

No. 13-0671/AR.  U.S. v. Shawn M. HINES.  CCA 20120024.

No. 13-0676/AF.  U.S. v. Robert J. DUTTON.  CCA S32002.

No. 13-0719/AR.  U.S. v. Michael O. HARROLD.  CCA 20110709.

No. 13-0722/AF.  U.S. v. William H. DAVENPORT.  CCA S32005.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 14-0080/AR.  U.S. v. Ryan L. BROWN.  CCA 20110932.

No. 14-0081/AR.  U.S. v. Natashia P. RHODIE.  CCA 20120437.

No. 14-0082/AR.  U.S. v. Moises REYES.  CCA 20121070.

No. 14-0083/MC.  U.S. v. Jose M. LOPEZ.  CCA 201200457.

No. 14-0084/AR.  U.S. v. Christopher GRAY.  CCA 20090259.

No. 14-0085/AR.  U.S. v. Damarcus D. MCGINTY.  CCA 20110627.

 

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

 

No. 14-0074/AR.  U.S. v. Ryan J. CALDERON.  CCA 20120014.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to October 15, 2013.

 

No. 14-0078/AR.  U.S. v. Michael B. MOLL.  CCA 20120472.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to October 15, 2013.

 

No. 14-0079/AR.  U.S. v. Sean G. ZEPEDA.  CCA 20120196.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to October 16, 2013.

 

 

In the Matter of the

RULES ADVISORY COMMITTEE

 

Pursuant to Rule 45 of the Rules of Practice and Procedure, United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, the following persons, whose terms expire on September 30, 2013, are, this 27th day of September, 2013, hereby reappointed as members of the Rules Advisory Committee for terms expiring on September 30, 2016:

 

Professor Steven H. Goldblatt, Chair

Michelle M. Lindo McCluer, Esq.

James E. McPherson, Esq.

 

The following members, whose terms expire on the dates indicated below, remain on the Rules Advisory Committee:

 

To expire on September 30, 2014:

 

Edward F. Rodriguez, Jr., Esq.

Colonel Patricia A. Ham, U.S. Army

Brian K. Keller, Esq.

 

 

To expire on September 30, 2015:

 

John F. DePue, Esq.

Malcolm Squires, Esq.

Colonel James Roan, U.S. Air Force

 

William A. DeCicco, Clerk of the Court, is an ex officio member of the Committee, and serves as its Reporter.

 

The Court wishes to express its great appreciation to David B. Goodhand, Esq., for his outstanding service as a member of the Rules Advisory Committee.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 14-018

Thursday, September 26, 2013

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED

 

No. 13-0637/NA.  U.S. v. Thomas C. MOORE.  CCA 201200332.

No. 13-0684/AR.  U.S. v. Michael D. LAFFERTY.  CCA 20111155.

No. 13-0725/AF.  U.S. v. Travis L. MCBRYDE.  CCA 38109.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 14-0074/AR.  U.S. v. Ryan J. CALDERON.  CCA 20120014.

No. 14-0075/AR.  U.S. v. Daniel C. MOORE.  CCA 20110436.

No. 14-0076/AF.  U.S. v. Fred W. HESS.  CCA 38232.

No. 14-0077/AR.  U.S. v. Robert L. DAVIS, Jr.  CCA 20120244.

No. 14-0078/AR.  U.S. v. Michael B. MOLL.  CCA 20120472.

No. 14-0079/AR.  U.S. v. Sean G. ZEPEDA.  CCA 20120196.

 

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

 

No. 14-0070/AR.  U.S. v. Steven V. RAGELS.  CCA 20110955.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to October 15, 2013.

 

No. 14-0071/AR.  U.S. v. Travis D. JONES.  CCA 20110679.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to October 15, 2013.

 

No. 14-0072/AR.  U.S. v. Eddie N. DIVIDU, Jr.  CCA 20120355.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to October 15, 2013.

 

No. 14-0073/AR.  U.S. v. Jose A. GUZMAN-BONANO.  CCA 20120011.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to October 15, 2013.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 14-017

Wednesday, September 25, 2013

 

APPEALS - SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS

 

No. 13-0509/AF.  U.S. v. Benjamin J. SIZEMORE.  CCA 38020.  Review granted on the following issue:

 

WHETHER THE AIR FORCE COURT'S DECISION MUST BE SET ASIDE BECAUSE ONE OF THE JUDGES WHO PARTICIPATED IN THE DECISION OF APPELLANT'S CASE WAS UNCONSTITUTIONALLY APPOINTED.

 

In light of Ryder v. United States, 515 U.S. 177 (1995) and United States v. Carpenter, 37 M.J. 291 (C.M.A. 1993), vacated, 515 U.S. 1138 (1995), 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 further review under Article 66, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), 10 U.S.C. § 866 (2006), by a properly appointed Court of Criminal Appeals.  Thereafter, Article 67(a), UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 867(a) (2006) will apply.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED

 

No. 13-0525/AR.  U.S. v. Matthew D. BELL.  CCA 20100266.

No. 13-0566/AF.  U.S. v. Sean C. BOGDONAS.  CCA 37725.

No. 13-0603/AR.  U.S. v. Anthony J. MARINO.  CCA 20120107.

No. 13-0609/AR.  U.S. v. Gregory R. MIEDEMA.  CCA 20110496.

No. 13-0640/NA.  U.S. v. Michael C. MESICK.  CCA 201200385.

No. 13-0644/AR.  U.S. v. Alfred L. PEMBERTON.  CCA 20110127.

No. 13-0652/NA.  U.S. v. Jesse O. COOPER.  CCA 201200470.

No. 13-0654/AF.  U.S. v. Jared R. BURDIN.  CCA 38033.

No. 13-0662/AF.  U.S. v. Kim L. SHARPE.  CCA S32011.

No. 13-0668/AR.  U.S. v. Gary L. LINDSEY.  CCA 20110299.

No. 13-0691/AF.  U.S. v. Randall W. GILLILAND.  CCA 37895.

No. 13-0708/AF.  U.S. v. Corey L. PAYTON.  CCA 37824.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 14-0069/AR.  U.S. v. Alex M. JOHNSON.  CCA 20110757.

No. 14-0070/AR.  U.S. v. Steven V. RAGELS.  CCA 20110955.

No. 14-0071/AR.  U.S. v. Travis D. JONES.  CCA 20110679.

No. 14-0072/AR.  U.S. v. Eddie N. DIVIDU, Jr.  CCA 20120355.

No. 14-0073/AR.  U.S. v. Jose A. GUZMAN-BONANO.  CCA 20120011.

 

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

 

No. 13-0671/AR.  U.S. v. Shawn M. HINES.  CCA 20120024.  Appellant's motion to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review out of time is denied.

 

No. 13-7001/AR.  U.S. v. Hasan K. AKBAR.  CCA 20050514.  Appellant's third motion to extend time to file a brief is granted to October 21, 2013.

 

No. 14-0061/AR.  U.S. v. Gareth A. DRUMMOND.  CCA 20110400.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to October 15, 2013.

 

No. 14-0062/AF.  U.S. v. Charles N. YOHE.  CCA 37950.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to October 15, 2013.

 

No. 14-0063/AF.  U.S. v. Jacinta-Marie R. TOMPKINS.  CCA 37627.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to October 15, 2013.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 14-016

Tuesday, September 24, 2013

 

ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW

 

No. 07-0725/MC.  U.S. v. Jonathan E. LEE.  CCA 200600543.  Review granted on the following issue:

 

WHETHER THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS ERRED IN FINDING NO DUE PROCESS VIOLATION WHERE 2,500 DAYS ELAPSED BETWEEN SENTENCING AND REMOVAL OF APPELLANT'S NAME FROM THE TEXAS SEX OFFENDER REGISTRY.

 

Briefs will be filed under Rule 25.

 

No. 13-0442/MC.  U.S. v. Charles C. HORNBACK.  CCA 201200241.  Review granted on the following issue:

 

WHETHER THE UNITED STATES NAVY-MARINE CORPS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS ERRED IN FINDING NO MATERIAL PREJUDICE TO APPELLANT'S SUBSTANTIAL RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL AFTER IT ASSUMED, WITHOUT DECIDING, THAT TRIAL COUNSEL'S ACTIONS AMOUNTED TO MISCONDUCT, AND WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE'S CURATIVE INSTRUCTIONS SUFFICIENTLY ADDRESSED THE CUMULATIVE NATURE OF SUCH CONDUCT AS WELL AS ANY CORRESPONDING PREJUDICE IN LIGHT OF THE FACTORS IDENTIFIED IN UNITED STATES v. FLETCHER, 62 M.J. 175 (C.A.A.F. 2005).

 

Briefs will be filed under Rule 25.

 

No. 13-0522/AF.  U.S. v. David J.A. GUTIERREZ.  CCA 37913.  Review granted on the following issues:

 

I.     WHETHER THE EVIDENCE WAS LEGALLY INSUFFICIENT TO FIND BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT THAT APPELLANT COMMITTED ASSAULT LIKELY TO RESULT IN GRIEVOUS BODILY HARM.

 

II.     WHETHER THE EVIDENCE WAS LEGALLY SUFFICIENT TO FIND BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT THAT APPELLANT COMMITTED ADULTERY.

 

Briefs will be filed under Rule 25.

 

No. 13-0565/AR.  U.S. v. Christopher R. KEARNS.  CCA 20110348.  Review granted on the following issue:

 

WHETHER THE EVIDENCE WAS LEGALLY SUFFICIENT TO PROVE THAT APPELLANT HAD THE INTENT TO ENGAGE IN CRIMINAL SEXUAL CONDUCT WITH KO, A MINOR, WHEN HE FACILITATED KO'S TRAVEL IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE AND WAS FOUND GUILTY IN SPECIFICATION 1 OF CHARGE III OF VIOLATING 18 U.S.C. SECTION 2423(a).

 

Briefs will be filed under Rule 25.

 

No. 13-0601/AF.  U.S. v. Korey J. TALKINGTON.  CCA 37785.  Review granted on the following issue:

 

WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE ERRED BY INSTRUCTING THE MEMBERS THAT CONSIDERATION OF SEX OFFENDER REGISTRATION IS "NOT A MATTER BEFORE THEM" AND "FRAUGHT WITH PROBLEMS."

 

Briefs will be filed under Rule 25.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED

 

No. 13-0446/AR.  U.S. v. William S. HARTGROVE.  CCA 20100743.

No. 13-0460/NA.  U.S. v. Ryan L. SANSCHAGRIN.  CCA 201200333.

No. 13-0467/MC.  U.S. v. Wilson M. SABERON.  CCA 201200103.

No. 13-0716/AR.  U.S. v. Michael S. CLARK.  CCA 20120364.

No. 13-0720/AR.  U.S. v. Joshua J. FULTON.  CCA 20120432.

No. 13-0721/AF.  U.S. v. Zachary L. ODONNAL.  CCA S32113.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 14-0065/AR.  U.S. v. Bobby K. FILLERS.  CCA 20130032.

No. 14-0066/AR.  U.S. v. Jonathan J. BLAIR.  CCA 20110846.

No. 14-0067/AR.  U.S. v. James A. HUBBARD.  CCA 20120218.

No. 14-0068/AR.  U.S. v. Jesse D. BRAZEAL.  CCA 20130102.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 14-015

Monday, September 23, 2013

 

APPEALS - SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS

 

No. 13-0196/MC.  U.S. v. Brian P. HICKERSON.  CCA 201100111.  On further consideration of the granted issue, 72 M.J. 159 (C.A.A.F. 2013), and in light of United States v. Kish, 72 M.J. 158 (C.A.A.F. 2013), it is ordered that the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals is set aside, and the case is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy for remand to the Court of Criminal Appeals for further consideration after the conclusion of its review in Kish.

 

No. 13-0213/MC.  U.S. v. Daniel W. SANDERS.  CCA 201300202.  On further consideration of the granted issue, 72 M.J. 159 (C.A.A.F. 2013), and in light of United States v. Kish, 72 M.J. 158 (C.A.A.F. 2013), it is ordered that the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals is set aside, and the case is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy for remand to the Court of Criminal Appeals for further consideration after the conclusion of its review in Kish.

 

No. 13-0241/MC.  U.S. v. Richard T. PEARCE.  CCA 201100110.  On further consideration of the granted issues, 72 M.J. 154 (C.A.A.F. 2013), and 72 M.J. 159 (C.A.A.F. 2013), in light of United States v. Castellano, 72 M.J. 217 (C.A.A.F. 2013), and United States v. Kish, 72 M.J. 158 (C.A.A.F. 2013), it is ordered that the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals is set aside, and the case is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy for remand to the Court of Criminal Appeals for further consideration after the conclusion of its review in Kish.

 

No. 13-0268/MC. U.S. v. Samuel PACHECO, Jr.  CCA 201200366.  On further consideration of the granted issue, 72 M.J. 164 (C.A.A.F. 2013), and in light of United States v. Kish, 72 M.J. 158 (C.A.A.F. 2013), it is ordered that the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals is set aside, and the case is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy for remand to the Court of Criminal Appeals for further consideration after the conclusion of its review in Kish.

 

No. 13-0269/MC.  U.S. v. Joshua W. TIGER.  CCA 201300284.  On further consideration of the granted issue, 72 M.J. 167 (C.A.A.F. 2013), and in light of United States v. Kish, 72 M.J. 158 (C.A.A.F. 2013), it is ordered that the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals is set aside, and the case is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy for remand to the Court of Criminal Appeals for further consideration after the conclusion of its review in Kish.

 

No. 13-0332/MC.  U.S. v. Chad J. BATCHELDER.  CCA 201200180.  On further consideration of the granted issue, 72 M.J. 261 (C.A.A.F. 2013), and in light of United States v. Kish, 72 M.J. 158 (C.A.A.F. 2013), it is ordered that the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals is set aside, and the case is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy for remand to the Court of Criminal Appeals for further consideration after the conclusion of its review in Kish.

 

No. 13-0352/MC.  U.S. v. Michael A. ARNOLD.  CCA 201200382.  On further consideration of the granted issue, 72 M.J. 261 (C.A.A.F. 2013), and in light of United States v. Kish, 72 M.J. 158 (C.A.A.F. 2013), it is ordered that the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals is set aside, and the cases are returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy for remand to the Court of Criminal Appeals for further consideration after the conclusion of its review in Kish.

 

No. 13-0408/MC.  U.S. v. Don W. BAILEY.  CCA 201200370.  On further consideration of the granted issue, __ M.J. __ (C.A.A.F. August 5, 2013), and in light of United States v. Kish, 72 M.J. 158 (C.A.A.F. 2013), it is ordered that the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals is set aside, and the cases are returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy for remand to the Court of Criminal Appeals for further consideration after the conclusion of its review in Kish.

 

No. 13-0444/MC. U.S. v. Steven W. MYRICK.  CCA 201200404.  On further consideration of the granted issue, 72 M.J. 384 (C.A.A.F. 2013), and in light of United States v. Kish, 72 M.J. 158 (C.A.A.F. 2013), it is ordered that the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals is set aside, and the case is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy for remand to the Court of Criminal Appeals for further consideration after the conclusion of its review in Kish.

 

No. 13-0445/MC.  U.S. v. Erik J. ELLIS.  CCA 201200406.  On further consideration of the granted issue, 72 M.J. 386 (C.A.A.F. 2013), and in light of United States v. Kish, 72 M.J. 158 (C.A.A.F. 2013), it is ordered that the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals is set aside, and the case is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy for remand to the Court of Criminal Appeals for further consideration after the conclusion of its review in Kish.

 

No. 13-5008/AF.  U.S. v. Alejandro V. ARRIAGA.  CCA 37439.  On consideration of the issues certified by the Judge Advocate General of the Air Force, 72 M.J. 410 (C.A.A.F. 2013), and Appellee's motion to strike, we conclude that the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals did not err in finding that Appellee was materially prejudiced by the government's failure to allege the terminal element for Specification 2 of Charge III alleging indecent assault in violation of Article 134, UCMJ.  See United States v. Goings, 72 M.J. 202 (C.A.A.F. 2013) and United States v. Gaskins, 72 M.J. 225 (C.A.A.F. 2013).  Accordingly, it is ordered that the first certified issue is answered in the affirmative and the second and third certified issues are answered in the negative, that the motion to strike is denied as moot, and the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals is hereby affirmed.

 

* Baker, Chief Judge (dissenting):

 

I dissent based on my dissenting opinions in United States v. Fosler, 70 M.J. 225, 240 (C.A.A.F. 2011) (Baker, J., dissenting), and United States v. Humphries, 71 M.J. 209, 217 (C.A.A.F. 2012) (Baker, C.J., dissenting).

 

No. 13-5009/AF.  U.S. v. Alan J. LINDGREN.  CCA 37928.  On consideration of the issues certified by the Judge Advocate General of the Air Force, __ M.J. __ (C.A.A.F. July 3, 2013), we conclude that the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals did not err in finding that Appellee was materially prejudiced by the government's failure to allege the terminal element for Specifications 1 and 2 of Charge III alleging negligent homicide in violation of Article 134, UCMJ.  See United States v. Goings, 72 M.J. 202 (C.A.A.F. 2013) and United States v. Gaskins, 72 M.J. 225 (C.A.A.F. 2013).  Accordingly, it is ordered that the first certified issue is answered in the affirmative and the second and third certified issues are answered in the negative, and the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals is hereby affirmed.

 

* Baker, Chief Judge (dissenting):

 

I dissent based on my dissenting opinions in United States v. Fosler, 70 M.J. 225, 240 (C.A.A.F. 2011) (Baker, J., dissenting), and United States v. Humphries, 71 M.J. 209, 217 (C.A.A.F. 2012) (Baker, C.J., dissenting). 

 

No. 13-0513/MC. U.S. v. Levon TYLER.  CCA 201200327.  On further consideration of the granted issue, __ M.J. __ (C.A.A.F. August 22, 2013), and in light of United States v. Kish, 72 M.J. 158 (C.A.A.F. 2013), it is ordered that the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals is set aside, and the case is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy for remand to the Court of Criminal Appeals for further consideration after the conclusion of its review in Kish.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED

 

No. 13-0618/AF.  U.S. v. Joseph M. BURKHART.  CCA 37668.

No. 13-0713/AR.  U.S. v. Davuale B. WILLIAMS.  CCA 20121064.

No. 13-0714/AR.  U.S. v. James B. GIBSON.  CCA 20120032.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 14-0058/AR.  U.S. v. Nathan R. KNIGHT.  CCA 20110858.

No. 14-0059/AR.  U.S. v. Nathan F. WERCINSKI.  CCA 20121074.

No. 14-0060/AF.  U.S. v. Jeremy J. GRAWEY.  CCA S32029.

No. 14-0061/AR.  U.S. v. Gareth A. DRUMMOND.  CCA 20110400.

No. 14-0062/AF.  U.S. v. Charles N. YOHE.  CCA 37950.

No. 14-0063/AF.  U.S. v. Jacinta-Marie R. TOMPKINS.  CCA 37627.

No. 14-0064/AR.  U.S. v. Michael L. TRANHUMPHRIES.  CCA 20120536.

 

MISCELLANEOUS DOCKET - SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS

 

Misc. No. 13-8037/AR. U.S. v. Tanner P. FORRY.  CCA 20080334.  On consideration ofthe writ-appeal petition and Appellee's motion to file government's designation of portions of the record to be included in the joint appendix pursuant to Rule 24(f), it is ordered that said motion is hereby granted, and that said writ-appeal petition is hereby dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

 

MISCELLANEOUS DOCKET - FILINGS

 

Misc. No. 14-8001/AR. Jeffrey A. SINCLAIR, Appellant v. United States of America, and James L. POHL, Colonel, U.S. Army, Military Judge, Appellees.  CCA 20130751..  Notice is hereby given that a writ-appeal petition for review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals on application for extraordinary relief was filed electronically under Rule 27(b), together with a motion for a stay of proceedings and a motion for leave of court to appear pro hac vice, on the 21st day of September, 2013, and placed on the docket this 23rd day of September, 2013.

 

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

 

No. 13-0459/AR.  U.S. v. Rollan D. MEAD.  CCA 20110717.  On consideration of Appellee's motion for leave to file a supplemental joint appendix, it is ordered that said motion is hereby granted.

 

No. 14-0001/AR.  U.S. v. George D. MACDONALD.  CCA 20091118.  Appellant's second motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted, up to and including October 8, 2013, and absent extraordinary circumstances, no further extension of time will be granted in this case.

 

No. 14-0054/AF.  U.S. v. Sharmaine L. LATHAM.  CCA 38107.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to October 8, 2013.

 

No. 14-0056/AF.  U.S. v. Gregory D. WEBB.  CCA 38071.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to October 10, 2013.

 

No. 14-0057/AF.  U.S. v. William R. JONES.  CCA 38028.  On consideration of Appellant's "Motion to treat out of time motion to reconsider before the Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals as a timely filed motion to reconsider," which this Court construes as a motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review, it is ordered that said motion is hereby granted to October 10, 2013.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 14-014

Friday, September 20, 2013

 

APPEALS - SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS

 

No. 12-0428/MC.  U.S. v. Stephen J. MCGUIRE.  CCA 201000611.  On further consideration of the granted issue, 72 M.J. 255 (C.A.A.F. 2013), and in view of United States v. Tunstall, 72 M.J. 191 (C.A.A.F. 2013), and United States v. Goings, 72 M.J. 202 (C.A.A.F. 2013), it is ordered that the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed 

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 12-0229/AR.  U.S. v. Roger S. DANES.  CCA 20091072.*

No. 13-0016/AR.  U.S. v. Daniel GASKINS.  CCA 20080132.**

No. 14-0052/AR.  U.S. v. Marcelo G. BALBOA.  CCA 20130253.

No. 14-0053/AR.  U.S. v. Brian L. JEFFERSON.  CCA 20111038.

No. 14-0054/AF.  U.S. v. Sharmaine L. LATHAM.  CCA 38107.

No. 14-0055/AR.  U.S. v. April C. MALONEY.  CCA 20120407.

No. 14-0056/AF.  U.S. v. Gregory D. WEBB.  CCA 38071.

No. 14-0057/AF.  U.S. v. William R. JONES.  CCA 38028.

 

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

 

No. 13-0348/AR.  U.S. v. Amanda M. MOSS.  CCA 20110337.  Upon further consideration of the above-captioned case, and as discussed at oral argument, it isordered that counsel file additional briefs on the following issues:

 

I.    Whether the decision to appeal to this Court is a personal decision of the Appellant, and if so, in what manner may such a decision be made?

 

II.   Whether there is any evidence in the record that the Appellant has authorized an appeal to this Court, and if there is no such authorization, is there nonetheless a continuing duty to represent the Appellant, and if so, from where does this duty derive?

 

III.  In circumstances where the Appellant cannot be located during the time period available to file a petition for grant of review at this Court, what is the responsibility of appellate defense counsel in the context of the statutory time limit in Article 67, UCMJ, to file an appeal?

 

IV.  Should this case be dismissed with prejudice under the holding in United States v. Schreck, 10 M.J. 226 (C.M.A. 1981)?

 

The Court invites the parties to address United States v. Larson, 66 M.J. 212 (C.A.A.F. 2008); United States v. Schreck,  9 M.J. 217 (C.M.A. 1980); Article 67(a)(3) and (b), UCMJ, and any other pertinent sources. Appellate defense counsel will file a brief on the above issues on or before October 4, 2013.  Appellate government counsel will file a brief on the above issues within 14 days of filing of the brief of the appellate defense counsel. The appellate government and appellate defense divisions of the Navy-Marine Corps, Air Force, and Coast Guard are invited to file amicus curiae briefs under Rule 26, U.S.C.A.A.F. Rules of Practice and Procedure.

_________________________________

 

*  Third petition filed in this case.

**  Second petition filed in this case.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 14-013

Thursday, September 19, 2013

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED

 

No. 13-0709/MC.  U.S. v. Kalleb M. WILSON.  CCA 201300122.

No. 13-0710/AF.  U.S. v. Christopher A. CUSHMAN.  CCA 38216.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 14-0048/AR.  U.S. v. Jason C. WAGNER.  CCA 20111064.

No. 14-0049/AR.  U.S. v. Robert A. WARREN.  CCA 20100914.

No. 14-0050/AF.  U.S. v. Thomas N. PATTERSON.  CCA 38031.

No. 14-0051/AF.  U.S. v. Daniel P. OPENSHAW.  CCA 38049.

 

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

 

No. 11-0567/AR.  U.S. v. Eric L. NORDIN.  CCA 20090044.  Appellant's second motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted, but only up to and including October 4, 2013, and absent extraordinary circumstances, no further extension of time will be granted in this case.

 

No. 13-0345/AF.  U.S. v. Robert M. PAYNE.  CCA 37594.

No. 13-0459/AR.  U.S. v. Rollan D. MEAD.  CCA 20110717.

No. 13-0518/AF.  U.S. v. Jordan C. PASSUT.  CCA 37755.

No. 13-0353/AF/13-5007/AF.  U.S. v. Laurence H. FINCH.  CCA 38081.

 

In view of the existence of a vacant position on the Court, notice is hereby given that the Chief Judge has called upon Senior Judge Andrew S. Effron to perform judicial duties in the above-referenced cases, and that Senior Judge Effron has consented to perform judicial duties in said cases under Article 142(e)(1)(A)(ii), Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 942(e)(1)(A)(ii) (2006).

 

No. 13-0733/AR.  U.S. v. Daniel C. ARIZMENDI.  CCA 20110966.  Appellant's second motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted, up to and including October 3, 2013, and absent extraordinary circumstances, no further extension of time will be granted in this case.

 

No. 14-0050/AF.  U.S. v. Thomas N. PATTERSON.  CCA 38031.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to October 9, 2013.


No. 14-0051/AF.  U.S. v. Daniel P. OPENSHAW.  CCA 38049.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to October 9, 2013.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 14-012

Wednesday, September 18, 2013

 

HEARINGS

 

No. 13-0435/AR.  U.S. v. Gary D. WARNER.  CCA 20120499.

No. 13-0348/AR.  U.S. v. Amanda M. MOSS.  CCA 20110337.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 14-0045/AR.  U.S. v. Armando R. BACCA.  CCA 20100396.

No. 14-0046/AR.  U.S. v. Edwin M. RIVERS.  CCA 20110309.

No. 14-0047/AR.  U.S. v. Jumar A. JONES.  CCA 20120309.

 

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

 

No. 14-0044/AF.  U.S. v. Morgan A. WINN.  CCA 37772.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to October 7, 2013.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 14-011

Tuesday, September 17, 2013

 

HEARINGS

 

No. 11-0280/AR.  U.S. v. Douglas K. WINCKELMANN.  CCA 20070243.

No. 13-0283/AF.  U.S. v. Timothy L. MERRITT.  CCA 37608.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED

 

No. 13-0660/AR.  U.S. v. Nathan A. SNOWDEN.  CCA 20111030.

No. 13-0698/AF.  U.S. v. Dexter D. GILLISON.  CCA S32112.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 14-0044/AF.  U.S. v. Morgan A. WINN.  CCA 37772.

 

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

 

No. 12-0414/AR.  U.S. v. David G. SPICER, Jr.  CCA 200900608.  Appellant's second motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted, but only up to and including October 1, 2013, and absent extraordinary circumstances, no further extension of time will be granted in this case.

 

No. 13-0724/AR.  U.S. v. Michael G. TOVAR.  CCA 20120015.  Appellant's second motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted, up to and including October 1, 2013, and absent extraordinary circumstances, no further extension of time will be granted in this case.

 

No. 13-0727/AR.  U.S. v. Larry W. REED, Jr.  CCA 20120589.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted, but only up to and including October 1, 2013, and absent extraordinary circumstances, no further extension of time will be granted in this case.

 

No. 14-0038/AF.  U.S. v. Kevin A. SLAGLE.  CCA 38087.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to October 7, 2013.

 

No. 14-0039/AF.  U.S. v. Yedeychem MANN.  CCA 38124.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to October 7, 2013.

 

No. 14-0041/AR.  U.S. v. Brandon A. TRIPP.  CCA 20111018.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to October 7, 2013.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 14-010

Monday, September 16, 2013

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 14-0038/AF.  U.S. v. Kevin A. SLAGLE.  CCA 38087.

No. 14-0039/AF.  U.S. v. Yedeychem MANN.  CCA 38124.

No. 14-0040/NA.  U.S. v. Ethan S. SHORT.  CCA 201200483.

No. 14-0041/AR.  U.S. v. Brandon A. TRIPP.  CCA 20111018.

No. 14-0042/AF.  U.S. v. Bryan C. JONES.  CCA S32015.

No. 14-0043/AF.  U.S. v. Sean WALL.  CCA 37842.

 

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

 

No. 14-0029/AR.  U.S. v. Ronald J. DAVIS.  CCA 20100815.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to October 3, 2013.

 

No. 14-0031/AF.  U.S. v. Gary B. HIGGINS.  CCA 38202.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to October 3, 2013.

 

No. 14-0035/AF.  U.S. v. Dennis D. KELLER.  CCA 37729.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to October 3, 2013.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 14-009

Friday, September 13, 2013

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED

 

No. 13-0537/AR.  U.S. v. Joseph A. SMITH.  CCA 20120329.

No. 13-0690/AF.  U.S. v. Austin F. CHAMBERLAIN.  CCA 38098.

No. 13-0692/AR.  U.S. v. Kayle T. SHIELDS.  CCA 20110984.

No. 13-0693/AR.  U.S. v. Cody J. PINKERMAN.  CCA 20120703.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 14-0030/AF.  U.S. v. James M. BOORE.  CCA 38058.

No. 14-0031/AF.  U.S. v. Gary B. HIGGINS.  CCA 38202.

No. 14-0032/AR.  U.S. v. Jeraldo L. DUNCOMBE.  CCA 20130090.

No. 14-0033/AF.  U.S. v. Anthony L.W. PEACOCK.  CCA 38043.

No. 14-0034/AR.  U.S. v. Alexander M. SERRALTA.  CCA 20121110.

No. 14-0035/AF.  U.S. v. Dennis D. KELLER.  CCA 37729.

No. 14-0036/AF.  U.S. v. Nicholas M. GARRISON.  CCA 38093.

No. 14-0037/AR.  U.S. v. Timothy J. JANEIRO, Jr.  CCA 20120519.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 14-008

Thursday, September 12, 2013

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 14-0029/AR.  U.S. v. Ronald J. DAVIS.  CCA 20100815.

 

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

 

No. 13-0705/AF.  U.S. v. Robert F. LINDSEY.  CCA 37894.  Appellant's motion to withdraw petition for grant of review granted.

 

No. 13-0711/AR.  U.S. v. Colt M. SMITH.  CCA 20110398.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted, up to and including September 24, 2013, and absent extraordinary circumstances, no further extension of time will be granted in this case.

 

No. 14-0023/AR.  U.S. v. Christopher M. DAHL.  CCA 20110385.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition of review granted to September 30, 2013.

 

No. 14-0024/AR.  U.S. v. Arthur J. CLAYTON, Jr.  CCA 20110742.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to September 30, 2013.

 

No. 14-0025/AR.  U.S. v. Anthony J. ELLIOTT.  CCA 20110876.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to September 30, 2013.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 14-007

Wednesday, September 11, 2013

 

ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW

 

No. 13-0570/AF.  U.S. v. Steven A. DANYLO.  CCA 37916.  Review granted on the following issues:

 

I.    WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE ERRED WHEN HE ONLY CONSIDERED THE PERIOD OF TIME FOR APPELLANT'S ARTICLE 62 APPEAL FOR THE PURPOSES OF APPELLANT'S SPEEDY TRIAL MOTION.

 

II.   WHETHER APPELLANT WAS DENIED HIS SIXTH AMENDMENT RIGHT TO SPEEDY TRIAL WHEN HIS COURT-MARTIAL OCCURRED 350 DAYS AFTER HE WAS PLACED IN PRETRIAL CONFINEMENT.

 

Briefs will be filed under Rule 25.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED

 

No. 13-0632/AR.  U.S. v. Mark TODD.  CCA 20111160.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 14-0026/AR.  U.S. v. Spencer D. JENKINS.  CCA 20120357.

No. 14-0027/AR.  U.S. v. Mark S. ASHLEY.  CCA 20120566.

No. 14-0028/AR.  U.S. v. Daniel A. JENKINS.  CCA 20121129.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW – SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS

 

No. 13-0492/AF.  U.S. v. Taylor T. STICKNEY.  CCA S32106.  On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals, and Appellant's motion for leave to file a supplemental issue, it is ordered that said motion is granted, and that said petition is hereby granted on the following issue: 

 

WHETHER THE AIR FORCE COURT'S DECISION MUST BE SET ASIDE BECAUSE ONE OF THE JUDGES WHO PARTICIPATED IN THE DECISION OF APPELLANT'S CASE WAS UNCONSTITUTIONALLY APPOINTED.

 

In light of Ryder v. United States, 515 U.S. 177 (1995) and United States v. Carpenter, 37 M.J. 291 (C.M.A. 1993), vacated, 515 U.S. 1138 (1995), 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 further review under Article 66, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), 10 U.S.C. § 866 (2006), by a properly appointed court of Criminal Appeals.  Thereafter, Article 67(a), UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 867(a) (2006) will apply.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 14-006

Tuesday, September 10, 2013

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED

 

No. 13-0387/AR.  U.S. v. David M. DERJAN.  CCA 20101039.

No. 13-0420/AF.  U.S. v. Travis A. SCHMIDT.  CCA 38220.

No. 13-0576/AR.  U.S. v. Ricky A. WALLS.  CCA 20110501.

No. 13-0610/AR.  U.S. v. Justin R. KING.  CCA 20120886.

No. 13-0689/AR.  U.S. v. Christopher L. SPEROW.  CCA 20110904.

 

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 14-0022/AF.  U.S. v. Kyle R. DIETZ.  CCA 38117.

No. 14-0023/AR.  U.S. v. Christopher M. DAHL.  CCA 20110385.

No. 14-0024/AR.  U.S. v. Arthur J. CLAYTON, Jr.  CCA 20110742.

No. 14-0025/AR.  U.S. v. Anthony J. ELLIOTT.  CCA 20110876.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW – SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS

 

No. 13-0500/AF.  U.S. v. Edward W. GUSSMAN.  CCA 38048.  On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals, and Appellant's motion for leave to file a supplemental issue, and motion to withdraw the petition for grant of review without prejudice, it is ordered that said motion to file a supplemental issue is hereby granted, that said motion to withdraw the petition for grant of review is hereby denied as moot, and that said petition is hereby granted on the following issue:

 

WHETHER THE AIR FORCE COURT'S DECISION MUST BE SET ASIDE BECAUSE ONE OF THE JUDGES WHO PARTICIPATED IN THE DECISION OF APPELLANT'S CASE WAS UNCONSTITUTIONALLY APPOINTED.

 

In light of Ryder v. United States, 515 U.S. 177 (1995) and United States v. Carpenter, 37 M.J. 291 (C.M.A. 1993), vacated, 515 U.S. 1138 (1995), 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 further review under Article 66, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), 10 U.S.C. § 866 (2006), by a properly appointed Court of Criminal Appeals.  Thereafter, Article 67(a), UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 867(a) (2006) will apply.

 

No. 13-0503/AF.  U.S. v. Valentino T. LEE.  CCA S32009.  On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals, and Appellant's motion for leave to file a supplemental issue, it is ordered that said motion is hereby granted, and that said petition is hereby granted on the following issue:

 

WHETHER THE AIR FORCE COURT'S DECISION MUST BE SET ASIDE BECAUSE ONE OF THE JUDGES WHO PARTICIPATED IN THE DECISION OF APPELLANT'S CASE WAS UNCONSTITUTIONALLY APPOINTED.

 

In light of Ryder v. United States, 515 U.S. 177 (1995) and United States v. Carpenter, 37 M.J. 291 (C.M.A. 1993), vacated, 515 U.S. 1138 (1995), 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 further review under Article 66, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), 10 U.S.C. § 866 (2006), by a properly appointed Court of Criminal Appeals.  Thereafter, Article 67(a), UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 867(a) (2006) will apply.

 

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

 

No. 13-0435/AR.  U.S. v. Gary D. WARNER.  CCA 20120499.  Appellant's motion to file an additional supplement denied.

 

No. 13-0537/AR.  U.S. v. Joseph A. SMITH.  CCA 20120329.  Appellant's motion for leave to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review out of time granted.

 

No. 13-0702/AR.  U.S. v. Douglas A. ALLEN IV.  CCA 20110584.  Appellant's second motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted, but only up to and including September 24, 2013, and that absent extraordinary circumstances, no further extension of time will be granted in this case.

 

No. 14-0018/AF.  U.S. v. Don WATKINS, Jr.  CCA S32114.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to September 30, 2013.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 14-005

Monday, September 9, 2013

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED

 

No. 13-0588/AR.  U.S. v. John P. FIGUEROA.  CCA 20110951.

No. 13-0679/AF.  U.S. v. Jessie L. WRIGHT.  CCA S32095.

No. 13-0680/AF.  U.S. v. Bryan C. MCMILLAN.  CCA 38189.

No. 13-0681/AF.  U.S. v. Adam D. CHEW.  CCA S32101.

No. 13-0685/AR.  U.S. v. Johnnie L. W. LETBETTER.  CCA 20120040.

No. 13-0686/AF.  U.S. v. Michael J. LAPOINTE.  CCA S32081.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 14-0015/AR.  U.S. v. Ryan D. DAVIS.  CCA 20120658.

No. 14-0016/AF.  U.S. v. James T. SPENCER, III.  CCA 37922.

No. 14-0017/AF.  U.S. v. Brian C. KATES.  CCA S32018.

No. 14-0018/AF.  U.S. v. Don WATKINS, Jr.  CCA S32114.

No. 14-0019/AR.  U.S. v. Joel F. BECKER.  CCA 20120478.

No. 14-0020/AR.  U.S. v. Thomas R. BALDWIN.  CCA 20120033.

No. 14-0021/AR.  U.S. v. James O. MATHIS, Jr.  CCA 20120580.

 

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

 

No. 14-0008/AF.  U.S. v. Adrian G. LARA.  CCA 37861.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to September 25, 2013.

 

No. 14-0010/AF.  U.S. v. Rafael VERDEJO-RUIZ.  CCA 37957.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to September 26, 2013.

 

No. 14-0011/AF.  U.S. v. Kendall NORMAN.  CCA 37945.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement for grant of review granted to September 26, 2013.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 14-004

Friday, September 6, 2013

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 14-0010/AF.  U.S. v. Rafael VERDEJO-RUIZ.  CCA 37957.

No. 14-0011/AF.  U.S. v. Kendall NORMAN.  CCA 37945.

No. 14-0012/AF.  U.S. v. Nicholas R. ELESPURU.  CCA 38055.

No. 14-0013/AF.  U.S. v. Christopher T. CHAMBERS.  CCA 38044.

No. 14-0014/AF.  U.S. v. Marcus J. DUKE.  CCA S31930.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 14-003

Thursday, September 5, 2013

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED

 

No. 13-0622/AF.  U.S. v. Brent A. SNELL.  CCA 37792.

No. 13-0647/MC.  U.S. v. Javier B. FUENTES.  CCA 201300006.

No. 13-0656/NA.  U.S. v. Daniel L. MURPHY.  CCA 201200486.

No. 13-0674/AR.  U.S. v. Frederick N. OWENS.  CCA 20110404.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 14-0005/AF.  U.S. v. Daniel A. FREY.  CCA 37759.

No. 14-0006/AR.  U.S. v. Jason W. GOSSAGE.  CCA 20120856.

No. 14-0007/AR.  U.S. v. Zach T. ROSE.  CCA 20111123.

No. 14-0008/AF.  U.S. v. Adrian G. LARA.  CCA 37861.

No. 14-0009/AR.  U.S. v. Jesus GUTIERREZ, Jr.  CCA 20120104.

 

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

 

No. 13-0387/AR.  U.S. v. David M. DERJAN.  CCA 20101039.  Appellant's motion to consider matters pursuant to U.S. v. Grostefon, 12 M.J. 431 (C.M.A. 1982) granted.

 

No. 13-0576/AR.  U.S. v. Ricky A. WALLS.  CCA 20110501.  Appellant's motion to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review out of time granted.

 

No. 13-0610/AR.  U.S. v. Justin R. KING.  CCA 20120886.  Appellant's motion for leave to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review out of time granted.

 

No. 13-0696/AR.  U.S. v. Phillip L. BARTIE.  CCA 20111179.  Appellant's second motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted, up to and including September 19, 2013, and absent extraordinary circumstances, no further extension of time will be granted in this case.

 

No. 13-0697/AR.  U.S. v. Patrick R. CRISWELL.  CCA 20110560.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted, but only up to and including September 19, 2013, and absent extraordinary circumstances, no further extension of time will be granted in this case.

 

No. 13-5010/AR.  U.S. v. Shawn M. HINES.  CCA 20120024.  Appellant's motion for leave to file a corrected joint appendix granted.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 14-002

Wednesday, September 4, 2013

 

PETITION FOR GRANT OF REVIEW - SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS

 

No. 12-0501/AF.  U.S. v. Jessica E. MCFADDEN.  CCA 37438.  Review granted on the following issue:

 

WHETHER THE AIR FORCE COURT'S DECISION MUST BE SET ASIDE BECAUSE ONE OF THE JUDGES WHO PARTICIPATED IN THE DECISION OF APPELLANT'S CASE WAS UNCONSTITUTIONALLY APPOINTED.

 

In light of Ryder v. United States, 515 U.S. 177 (1995) and United States v. Carpenter, 37 M.J. 291 (C.M.A. 1993), vacated, 515 U.S. 1138 (1995), 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 further review under Article 66, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), 10 U.S.C. § 866 (2006), by a properly appointed Court of Criminal Appeals.  Thereafter, Article 67(a), UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 867(a) (2006) will apply.  [See also ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW this date.]

 

No. 13-0487/AF.  U.S. v. Marquis W. KNIGHT.  CCA 38083.  On consideration of Appellant's motion to withdraw the petition for grant of review without prejudice and motion to attach consent to withdraw case still subject to service court review, it is ordered that said motions are hereby granted.

 

No. 13-0524/AF.  U.S. v. Senator G. NEGRON.  CCA 37754.  On consideration of Appellee's motion for leave to file a response to Appellant's reply and Appellant's petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said motion is granted, said petition is hereby granted on the following issue:

 

WHETHER THE CIVILIAN JUDGE ON APPELLANT'S AIR FORCE COURT PANEL WAS UNCONSTITUTIONALLY APPOINTED.

 

In light of Ryder v. United States, 515 U.S. 177 (1995) and United States v. Carpenter, 37 M.J. 291 (C.M.A. 1993), vacated, 515 U.S. 1138 (1995), 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 further review under Article 66, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), 10 U.S.C. § 866 (2006), by a properly appointed Court of Criminal Appeals.  Thereafter, Article 67(a), UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 867 (2006) will apply.  [See also ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW this date.]  

 

No. 13-0669/AR.  U.S. v. Brandon T. PARKER.  CCA 20110248.  On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals, and in view of United States v. Goings, 72 M.J. 202 (C.A.A.F. 2013) and United States v. Gaskins, 72 M.J. 225 (C.A.A.F. 2013), it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the following assigned issue:

 

WHETHER THE ARMY COURT ERRED WHEN IT FOUND THAT THE   FAILURE TO PLEAD THE TERMINAL ELEMENTS IN APPELLANT'S CASE DID NOT RESULT IN MATERIAL PREJUDICE TO APPELLANT'S RIGHT TO NOTICE WHERE THE ARMY COURT MERELY FOUND "INDIRECT MENTION" OF A TERMINAL ELEMENT THROUGH WITNESS TESTIMONY.

 

The decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals is reversed as to Charge III and its specifications and as to the sentence.  The findings of guilty to Charge III and its specifications are set aside.  The remaining findings are affirmed.  The record is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Army for remand to the Court of Criminal Appeals.  That court may either dismiss Charge III and its specifications and reassess the sentence based on the affirmed findings, or it may order a rehearing on the affected charge and the sentence.  [See also ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW this date.]  

 

ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW

 

No. 12-0501/AF.  U.S. v. Jessica E. MCFADDEN.  CCA 37438.  [See also APPEALS-SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS this date.]

 

No. 13-0524/AF.  U.S. v. Senator G. NEGRON.  CCA 37754.  [See also APPEALS-SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS this date.]

 

No. 13-0669/AR.  U.S. v. Brandon T. PARKER.  CCA 20110248.  [See also APPEALS-SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS this date.]

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED

 

No. 13-0544/AR.  U.S. v. Johnny F. PROTHRO.  CCA 20110331.

No. 13-0620/AR.  U.S. v. Cavin B. MCKEN.  CCA 20121019.

No. 13-0639/AR.  U.S. v. Shannon B. HELTON.  CCA 20110623.

No. 13-0649/AR.  U.S. v. Jason W. MCCARVER.  CCA 20120490.

No. 13-0670/AR.  U.S. v. Matthew J. BROWN.  CCA 20120913.

No. 13-0673/AF.  U.S. v. Quinton M. ALSTON.  CCA S32111.

 

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

 

No. 13-0420/AF.  U.S. v. Travis A. SCHMIDT.  CCA 38220.  Appellant's motion for leave to file a second petition for grant of review and a supplement to said petition for grant of review is granted.

 

No. 14-0001/AR.  U.S. v. George D. MACDONALD.  CCA 20091118.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to September 23, 2013.

 

No. 14-0003/AF.  U.S. v. Allen K. HOHENSTEIN.  CCA 37965.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to September 23, 2013.

 

SPECIAL DOCKET MATTERS

 

No. 13-03.  In the matter of William G. Parker.  It appearing that the above-named attorney is a member of the Bar of this Court, that he was suspended indefinitely from the practice of law in Navy courts, to include the U.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals by the Judge Advocate General of the Navy, that pursuant to Rule 15(b), Rules of Practice and Procedure, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, said attorney was suspended from the practice of law before the Court on July 16, 2013, and afforded 30 days to show cause why he should not be disbarred, and that no matters have been submitted by the said attorney, it is ordered that William G. Parker is hereby suspended indefinitely from the practice of law before this Court, effective this date.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 14-001

Tuesday, September 3, 2013

 

NOTICE

 

IN RE SEPTEMBER 2013 TERM OF COURT

 

Article 142 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), 10 U.S.C. § 942 (2006) authorizes the appointment of five judges to serve on the Court.  One of the positions is vacant.  Unless the Court issues a notice that a senior judge or an Article III judge will perform judicial duties, the four judges in active service will perform the functions of the Court.  See Articles 142 and 144, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. §§ 942 and 944, and U.S.C.A.A.F. Rule 6(a).

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED

 

No. 13-0548/AR.  U.S. v. Detric A. KELLY.  CCA 20110138.

No. 13-0549/CG.  U.S. v. David N. SHANNON.  CCA 1358.

No. 13-0605/MC.  U.S. v. Hector Y. APARCIO.  CCA 201200408.

No. 13-0606/AR.  U.S. v. Christopher MILLENDER.  CCA 20100680.

No. 13-0638/AR.  U.S. v. Christopher L. BURNETT, Jr.  CCA 20110240.

No. 13-0642/AF.  U.S. v. Brent J. MIZE.  CCA 37993.

No. 13-0645/AR.  U.S. v. Kayla R. HORNE.  CCA 20120188.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 13-0426/AF.  U.S. v. Andre G. GNASH.  CCA S32067.*

No. 14-0001/AR.  U.S. v. George D. MACDONALD.  CCA 20091118.

No. 14-0002/AR.  U.S. v. Corey S. LEBEAU.  CCA 20111096.

No. 14-0003/AF.  U.S. v. Allen K. HOHENSTEIN.  CCA 37965.

No. 14-0004/AF.  U.S. v. Carlos E.F. THOMAS.  CCA 37896.

_______________________________

 

* Second petition filed in this case.



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