UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Wednesday, November 30, 2016

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 17-0109/AR. U.S. v. Charles Bonilla. CCA 20131084.

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Denied

 

No. 17-0005/AR. U.S. v. Donavon A. Scott. CCA 20150127.

 

Orders Granting Petition for Review

 

No. 16-0641/AR. U.S. v. Ian T. Miller. CCA 20150170. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals and the pleadings, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the following issues:

 

I. WHETHER ACCEPTANCE OF APPOINTMENT AS A CMCR JUDGE TERMINATED THE MILITARY COMMISSION OF JUDGE CELTNIEKS.

 

II. WHETHER, AS AN APPOINTED JUDGE OF THE CMCR, JUDGE CELTNIEKS DID NOT MEET THE UCMJ DEFINITION OF APPELLATE MILITARY JUDGE.

 

III. WHETHER THE ASSIGNMENT OF INFERIOR OFFICERS AND PRINCIPAL OFFICERS TO A SINGLE JUDICIAL TRIBUNAL ITSELF VIOLATED THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE.

 

No briefs will be filed under Rule 25.

 

No. 17-0010/MC. U.S. v. Alfredo Solis. CCA 201500249. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the following issue:

 

WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE ERRED WHEN HE INSTRUCTED THE MEMBERS, "IF BASED ON YOUR CONSIDERATION OF THE EVIDENCE, YOU ARE FIRMLY CONVINCED THAT THE ACCUSED IS GUILTY OF THE CRIME CHARGED, YOU MUST FIND HIM GUILTY," WHERE SUCH AN INSTRUCTION IS IN VIOLATION OF UNITED STATES v. MARTIN LINEN SUPPLY CO., 430 U.S. 564, 572-73 (1977), AND THERE IS INCONSISTENT APPLICATION BETWEEN THE SERVICES OF THE INSTRUCTIONS RELATING TO WHEN MEMBERS MUST OR SHOULD CONVICT AN ACCUSED.

 

No briefs will be filed under Rule 25.

 

No. 17-0040/AR. U.S. v. Keith D. Land. CCA 20160220. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the following issues:

 

I. WHETHER ACCEPTANCE OF APPOINTMENT AS A COURT OF MILITARY COMMISSION JUDGE TERMINATED THE MILITARY COMMISSION OF JUDGE HERRING.

 

II. WHETHER, AS AN APPOINTED JUDGE OF THE COURT OF MILITARY COMMISSION REVIEW, JUDGE HERRING DID NOT MEET THE UCMJ DEFINITION OF APPELLATE MILITARY JUDGE.

 

III. WHETHER THE ASSIGNMENT OF INFERIOR OFFICERS AND PRINCIPAL OFFICERS TO A SINGLE JUDICIAL TRIBUNAL ITSELF VIOLATED THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE.

 

No briefs will be filed under Rule 25.

 

No. 17-0065/AR. U.S. v. Cassandra M. Riley. CCA 20150687. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the following issues:

 

I. WHETHER ACCEPTANCE OF APPOINTMENT AS A CMCR JUDGE TERMINATED THE MILITARY COMMISSION OF JUDGES BURTON AND CELTNIEKS.

 

II. WHETHER, AS AN APPOINTED JUDGE OF THE CMCR, JUDGES BURTON AND CELTNIEKS DID NOT MEET THE UCMJ DEFINITION OF APPELLATE MILITARY JUDGE.

 

III. WHETHER THE ASSIGNMENT OF INFERIOR OFFICERS AND PRINCIPAL OFFICERS TO A SINGLE JUDICIAL TRIBUNAL ITSELF VIOLATED THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE.

 

No briefs will be filed under Rule 25.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Tuesday, November 29, 2016

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Denied

 

No. 16-0706/AR. U.S. v. Travis L. Gallegos. CCA 20130926.

No. 16-0744/AR. U.S. v. Edmourd P. Touchette. CCA 20150439.

No. 16-0762/AR. U.S. v. Tommie E. Crumedy. CCA 20140128.

No. 17-0036/AF. U.S. v. Joseph L. Camacho, Jr. CCA S32324.

No. 17-0045/AF. U.S. v. Dane A. Naro. CCA S32305.

No. 17-0046/AF. U.S. v. James M. Sauter, Jr. CCA 38772.

 

Petitions for Grant of Review - Summary Dispositions

 

No. 16-0696/AR. U.S. v. William G. Inman. CCA 20150042. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the following assigned issue:

 

WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE SHOULD HAVE DISQUALIFIED HIMSELF BECAUSE HE HAD PREVIOUSLY ACTED AS COUNSEL IN APPELLANT'S CASE, AND BECAUSE HE EXPRESSED AN OPINION CONCERNING THE GUILT OR INNOCENCE OF APPELLANT WHEN SERVING AS CHIEF OF MILITARY JUSTICE.

 

The decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals is set aside. The record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Army for remand to that court for further appellate inquiry of the granted issue. Under Article 66(c), Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), 10 U.S.C. 866(c) (2012), the Court of Criminal Appeals shall review the issue in light of Appellant's exhibits submitted to and admitted by this Court and any other relevant matters. See United States v. Ginn, 47 M.J. 236 (C.A.A.F. 1997). If the court determines that a factfinding hearing is necessary, that court shall order a hearing pursuant to United States v. DuBay, 17 C.M.A. 147, 37 C.M.R. 411 (1967). Once the necessary information is obtained, the court will complete its Article 66(c), UCMJ, review. Thereafter, Article 67, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. 867 (2012), shall apply.

 

Miscellaneous Docket - Summary Dispositions

 

No. 17-0053/AR. Jeffrey R. Kuntz, Appellant v. United States, Appellee. CCA 20160577. On consideration of the writ-appeal petition, it is ordered that said writ-appeal petition is hereby dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

 

Orders Granting Petition for Review

 

No. 16-0616/AF. U.S. v. Kelvin L. O'Shaughnessy. CCA 38732. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the following issues:

 

I.  CMCR JUDGE MITCHELL WAS NOT STATUTORILY AUTHORIZED TO SIT ON THE AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS.

 

II. EVEN IF CMCR JUDGE MITCHELL WAS STATUTORILY AUTHORIZED TO BE ASSIGNED TO THE AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS, HIS SERVICE ON BOTH COURTS VIOLATED THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE GIVEN HIS NEWLY ATTAINED STATUS AS A SUPERIOR OFFICER.

 

No briefs will be filed under Rule 25.

 

No. 16-0675/AF. U.S. v. Brandi D. Medeiros. CCA S32289. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the following issues:

 

I.  WHETHER THE UNITED STATES COURT OF MILITARY COMMISSION REVIEW JUDGE, MARTIN T. MITCHELL, WAS STATUTORILY AUTHORIZED TO SIT AS ONE OF THE AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS JUDGES ON THE PANEL THAT DECIDED APPELLANT'S CASE.

 

II. WHETHER JUDGE MARTIN T. MITCHELL'S SERVICE ON BOTH THE AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS AND THE UNITED STATES COURT OF MILITARY COMMISSION REVIEW VIOLATED THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE GIVEN HIS STATUS AS A SUPERIOR OFFICER ON THE UNITED STATES COURT OF MILITARY COMMISSION REVIEW.

 

No briefs will be filed under Rule 25.

 

No. 16-0716/AR. U.S. v. Manuel Ortiz III. CCA 20150267. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the following issues:

 

I.   WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE WRONGLY APPLIED MILITARY RULE OF EVIDENCE 414 TO CHARGED MISCONDUCT, THEREBY LOWERING THE GOVERNMENT'S BURDEN OF PROOF AND VIOLATING APPELLANT'S CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS.

 

II.  WHETHER ACCEPTANCE OF APPOINTMENT AS A CMCR JUDGE TERMINATED THE MILITARY COMMISSION OF JUDGE CELTNIEKS.

 

III. WHETHER, AS AN APPOINTED JUDGE OF THE CMCR, JUDGE CELTNIEKS DID NOT MEET THE UCMJ DEFINITION OF APPELLATE MILITARY JUDGE.

 

IV. WHETHER THE ASSIGNMENT OF INFERIOR OFFICERS AND PRINCIPAL OFFICERS TO A SINGLE JUDICIAL TRIBUNAL ITSELF VIOLATED THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE.

 

No briefs will be filed under Rule 25.

 

No. 16-0749/AR. U.S. v. Richard S. Carroll. CCA 20150049. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the following issues:

 

I.   WHETHER ACCEPTANCE OF APPOINTMENT AS A CMCR JUDGE TERMINATED THE MILITARY COMMISSIONS OF JUDGE HERRING AND JUDGE BURTON.

 

II.  WHETHER, AS APPOINTED JUDGES OF THE CMCR, JUDGE HERRING AND JUDGE BURTON DID NOT MEET THE UCMJ DEFINITION OF APPELLATE MILITARY JUDGES.

 

III. WHETHER THE ASSIGNMENT OF INFERIOR OFFICERS AND PRINCIPAL OFFICERS TO A SINGLE JUDICIAL TRIBUNAL ITSELF VIOLATED THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE.

 

No briefs will be filed under Rule 25.

 

Interlocutory Orders

 

No. 16-0586/MC. U.S. v. Nhubu C. Chikaka. CCA 201400251. Appellant's motion to supplement the petition for grant of review is granted.*

 

No. 17-0107/AR. U.S. v. Brandon D. Blake. CCA 20140685. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to December 19, 2016.

 

No. 17-0108/MC. U.S. v. Jesus I. Gallardo. CCA 201500199. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to December 19, 2016.

 

Petitions for New Trial Denied

 

No. 17-0006/AR. U.S. v. Travis L. Gallegos. CCA 20130926.

_______________________________

 

* Judge Ryan did not participate.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Monday, November 28, 2016

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 17-0105/AR. U.S. v. Anthony v. Santucci. CCA 20140216.

No. 17-0106/AR. U.S. v. James D. Bragg, Jr. CCA 20150017.

No. 17-0107/AR. U.S. v. Brandon D. Blake. CCA 20140685.

No. 17-0108/MC. U.S. v. Jesus I. Gallardo. CCA 201500199.

 

Interlocutory Orders

 

No. 17-0072/AR. U.S. v. O'Jay R. Woods, Jr. CCA 20150016. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to December 15, 2016.

 

No. 17-0101/NA. U.S. v. Mark J. Winiecki. CCA 201600031. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to December 13, 2016.

 

No. 17-0102/AR. U.S. v. Fernando P. Cabrera. CCA 20150035. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to December 13, 2016.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Wednesday, November 23, 2016

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 17-0100/MC. U.S. v. Blake D. Evans. CCA 201600085.

No. 17-0101/NA. U.S. v. Mark J. Winiecki. CCA 201600031.

No. 17-0102/AR. U.S. v. Fernando P. Cabrera. CCA 20150035.

No. 17-0103/MC. U.S. v. Anthony D. Delagarza. CCA 20160081.

No. 17-0104/MC. U.S. v. Tyler W. Hartmann. CCA 20160091.

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Denied

 

No. 17-0013/AF. U.S. v. Alex R. Goss. CCA 38805.

 

Miscellaneous Docket - Filings

 

No. 17-0099/AR. In Re Timothy B. Hennis, Petitioner. Notice is hereby given that a petition for extraordinary relief in the nature of a writ of mandamus or other appropriate relief was filed under Rule 27(a) on this date.

 

Orders Granting Petition for Review

 

No. 16-0424/MC. U.S. v. Mark J. Rosario. CCA 201500251. On further consideration of the record and the pleadings, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the following issue:

 

WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE ERRED WHEN HE INSTRUCTED THE MEMBERS, "IF BASED ON YOUR CONSIDERATION OF THE EVIDENCE, YOU ARE FIRMLY CONVINCED THAT THE ACCUSED IS GUILTY OF THE CRIME CHARGED, YOU MUST FIND HIM GUILTY," WHERE SUCH AN INSTRUCTION IS IN VIOLATION OF UNITED STATES v. MARTIN LINEN SUPPLY CO., 430 U.S. 564, 572-73 (1977) AND THERE IS INCONSISTENT APPLICATION BETWEEN THE SERVICES OF THE INSTRUCTIONS RELATING TO WHEN MEMBERS MUST OR SHOULD CONVICT AN ACCUSED.

 

No briefs will be filed under Rule 25, and oral argument will not be heard on this issue at the December 6, 2016, hearing.

 

No. 16-0748/NA. U.S. v. David W. Neiman. CCA 201500119. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the following issue:

 

WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE ERRED WHEN HE INSTRUCTED THE MEMBERS, "IF BASED ON YOUR CONSIDERATION OF THE EVIDENCE, YOU ARE FIRMLY CONVINCED THAT THE ACCUSED IS GUILTY OF THE CRIME CHARGED, YOU MUST FIND HIM GUILTY."

 

No briefs will be filed under Rule 25.

 

No. 17-0003/AR. U.S. v. Christopher B. Hukill. CCA 20140939. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the following issues:

 

I.  WHETHER, IN A COURT-MARTIAL TRIED BY MILITARY JUDGE ALONE, THE MILITARY JUDGE ABUSED HIS DISCRETION BY GRANTING THE GOVERNMENT'S MOTION TO USE THE CHARGED SEXUAL MISCONDUCT FOR MILITARY RULE OF EVIDENCE 413 PURPOSES TO PROVE PROPENSITY TO COMMIT THE CHARGED SEXUAL MISCONDUCT.

 

II. WHETHER JUDGE PAULETTE V. BURTON AND JUDGE LARSS G. CELTNIEKS, JUDGES ON THE COURT OF MILITARY COMMISSION REVIEW WERE STATUTORILY AUTHORIZED TO SIT ON THE ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS, AND EVEN IF THEY WERE STATUTORILY AUTHORIZED TO BE ASSIGNED TO THE ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS, WHETHER THEIR SERVICE ON BOTH COURTS VIOLATED THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE GIVEN THEIR NEWLY ATTAINED STATUS AS A SUPERIOR OFFICER.

 

Briefs will be filed under Rule 25 on Issue I only.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Tuesday, November 22, 2016

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 17-0094/AR. U.S. v. Jeffrey W. Thompson, Jr. CCA 20160169.

No. 17-0095/AR. U.S. v. Marcus V. Davis. CCA 20150100.

No. 17-0096/AR. U.S. v. Jonathan Guzman. CCA 20140465.

No. 17-0097/CG. U.S. v. Johannes P. Boerlage. CCA 1423.

 

Miscellaneous Docket - Filings

 

No. 17-0098/AF. Yogendra Rambharose, Petitioner v. United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals, Respondent. Notice is hereby given that a petition for extraordinary relief in the nature of a writ of mandamus was filed under Rule 27(a) on this date.

 

Interlocutory Orders

 

No. 16-0475/AF. U.S. v. Nathan G. Wilson-Crow. CCA 38706. On consideration of Appellant's motion for leave to file an additional supplement to the petition for grant of review, it is ordered that said motion is hereby granted. Appellee may file an answer to the additional supplement to the petition for grant of review on or before December 12, 2016.

 

No. 16-0487/AR. U.S. v. Mario I. Lopez. CCA 20140973. Appellant's motion to extend time to file a reply brief granted to November 29, 2016.

 

No. 16-0658/AR. U.S. v. Tyler F. Ho. CCA 20140068. Appellant's motion to extend time to file a brief granted to December 2, 2016.

 

No. 16-0711/AF. U.S. v. Michael J.D. Briggs. CCA 38730. On consideration of Appellant's motion to file a separate appendix pursuant to United States v. Grostefon, 12 M.J. 431 (C.M.A. 1982), it is ordered that said motion is hereby granted.

 

No. 17-0006/AR. U.S. v. Travis L. Gallegos. CCA 20130926. On consideration of Appellee's motion to attach Government Appellate Exhibits 1-4, it is ordered that said motion is hereby granted.

 

No. 17-0057/AR. U.S. v. Timothy L. Lawrence. CCA 20150359. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to December 12, 2016.

 

No. 17-0086/AF. U.S. v. Patrick Carter. CCA 38708. On consideration of Appellee/Cross-Appellant's 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 December 8, 2016.

 

No. 17-0090/AR. U.S. v. Ronnie T. Williams. CCA 20150302. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to December 8, 2016.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Monday, November 21, 2016

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 17-0088/MC. U.S. v. Willie B. Paris, Jr. CCA 201600044.

No. 17-0089/AR. U.S. v. Joshua T. Blazer. CCA 20150135.

No. 17-0090/AR. U.S. v. Ronnie T. Williams. CCA 20150302.

No. 17-0091/AR. U.S. v. Stefan S. Hughes. CCA 20150022.

No. 17-0092/AR. U.S. v. Joseph A. Warren. CCA 20150602.

No. 17-0093/AR. U.S. v. Michael B. O'Connor. CCA 20130853.

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Denied

 

No. 17-0030/AF. U.S. v. Kyle A. Drake. CCA S32358.

 

Orders Granting Petition for Review

 

No. 16-0719/AR. U.S. v. John G. Birdsong. CCA 20140887. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the following issues:

 

I.    WHETHER ACCEPTANCE OF APPOINTMENT AS A CMCR JUDGE TERMINATED THE MILITARY COMMISSION OF JUDGE HERRING.

 

II.   WHETHER, AS AN APPOINTED JUDGE OF THE CMCR, JUDGE HERRING DID NOT MEET THE UCMJ DEFINITION OF APPELLATE MILITARY JUDGE.

 

III.  WHETHER THE ASSIGNMENT OF INFERIOR OFFICERS AND PRINCIPAL OFFICERS TO A SINGLE JUDICIAL TRIBUNAL ITSELF VIOLATED THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE.

 

No briefs will be filed under Rule 25.

 

No. 16-0735/AR. U.S. v. Rhandall S. Lavasseur, Jr. CCA 20150475. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the following issues:

 

I.    WHETHER ACCEPTANCE OF APPOINTMENT AS A CMCR JUDGE TERMINATED THE MILITARY COMMISSION OF JUDGE HERRING.

 

II.   WHETHER, AS AN APPOINTED JUDGE OF THE CMCR, JUDGE HERRING DID NOT MEET THE UCMJ DEFINITION OF APPELLATE MILITARY JUDGE.

 

III.  WHETHER THE ASSIGNMENT OF INFERIOR OFFICERS AND PRINCIPAL OFFICERS TO A SINGLE JUDICIAL TRIBUNAL ITSELF VIOLATED THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE.

 

No briefs will be filed under Rule 25.

 

No. 17-0047/AR. U.S. v. Adrian T. Douglas. CCA 20140449. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the following issues:

 

I.    WHETHER ACCEPTANCE OF APPOINTMENT AS CMCR JUDGES TERMINATED THE MILITARY COMMISSIONS OF JUDGES BURTON AND CELTNIEKS.

 

II.   WHETHER, AS APPOINTED JUDGES OF THE CMCR, JUDGES BURTON AND CELTNIEKS DID NOT MEET THE UCMJ DEFINITION OF APPELLATE MILITARY JUDGES.

 

III.  WHETHER THE ASSIGNMENT OF INFERIOR OFFICERS AND PRINCIPAL OFFICERS TO A SINGLE JUDICIAL TRIBUNAL ITSELF VIOLATED THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE.

 

No briefs will be filed under Rule 25.

 

Interlocutory Orders

 

No. 16-0651/AF. U.S. v. Nicole A. Dalmazzi. CCA 38808. On further consideration of the record of trial, as supplemented following the order of the Court dated October 28, 2016, it is ordered that the parties brief the following specified issue:

 

WHETHER THE ISSUES GRANTED FOR REVIEW ARE MOOT WHERE THE RECORD REFLECTS THAT: MARTIN T. MITCHELL TOOK AN OATH PURPORTING TO INSTALL HIM AS A JUDGE OF THE U.S. COURT OF MILITARY COMMISSION REVIEW (CMCR) ON MAY 2, 2016; THE AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS (AFCCA) ISSUED AN OPINION IN THE UNDERLYING CASE WITH JUDGE MITCHELL PARTICIPATING IN HIS CAPACITY AS AN AFCCA JUDGE ON MAY 12, 2016; AND THE PRESIDENT DID NOT APPOINT MITCHELL TO THE CMCR UNTIL MAY 25, 2016.

 

The parties will brief this issue contemporaneously, and file their briefs on or before December 1, 2016.  It is further ordered that the Court will hear oral argument only on the specified issue at the hearing scheduled for December 7, 2016, and that the order allotting amicus curiae 10 minutes to present oral argument is hereby rescinded.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Friday, November 18, 2016

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 17-0085/AF. U.S. v. Robert A. Carrubba. CCA S32341.

No. 17-0086/AF. U.S. v. Patrick Carter. CCA 38708.

No. 17-0087/AR. U.S. v. Jameson T. Hazelbower. CCA 20150335.

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Denied

 

No. 17-0019/AR. U.S. v. Luavasa F. Tauala, Jr. CCA 20140658.

No. 17-0022/AR. U.S. v. Joseph A. Warren. CCA 20150104.

No. 17-0023/AR. U.S. v. Sammy G. Gulley. CCA 20160196.

 

Interlocutory Orders

 

No. 17-0037/AF. U.S. v. Cory D. Phillips. CCA 38771. Appellant's motion for leave to file a corrected supplement to the petition for grant of review granted.

 

No. 17-0074/AR. U.S. v. Jose L. Nataren. CCA 20130413. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to November 30, 2016.

 

No. 17-0078/AR. U.S. v. Garnard W. Burnside III. CCA 20130193. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to December 7, 2016.

 

No. 17-0083/AR. U.S. v. Thomas L. Humburd, Jr. CCA 20150214. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to December 5, 2016.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Thursday, November 17, 2016

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 17-0080/CG. U.S. v. Daniel G. Eyer. CCA 1417.

No. 17-0081/AR. U.S. v. Eric A. Leroy. CCA 20160294.

No. 17-0082/AR. U.S. v. Walter L. Graham, Jr. CCA 20150364.

No. 17-0083/AR. U.S. v. Thomas L. Humburd, Jr. CCA 20150214.

No. 17-0084/AR. U.S. v. James N. Costigan. CCA 20150052.

 

Orders Granting Petition for Review

 

No. 17-0032/AR. U.S. v. Sean M. Ahern. CCA 20130822. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the following issue:

 

WHETHER THE LOWER COURT ERRED WHEN IT HELD THAT THE PROHIBITION AGAINST USING AN ADMISSION BY SILENCE PROVIDED BY MIL. R. EVID. 304(a)(2) IS TRIGGERED ONLY "WHEN THE ACCUSED IS AWARE OF" AN INVESTIGATION CONTRARY TO THE PLAIN LANGUAGE OF THE RULE.

 

Briefs will be filed under Rule 25.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Wednesday, November 16, 2016

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 17-0078/AR. U.S. v. Garnard W. Burnside III. CCA 20130193.

 

Certificates for Review Filed

 

No. 17-0079/AF. United States, Appellant v. Patrick Carter, Appellee. CCA 38708. Notice is hereby given that a certificate for review of the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals was filed under Rule 22 on this date on the following issue:

 

WHETHER THE AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS (AFCCA) ERRED BY FINDING THAT THE CONVENING AUTHORITY EXCEEDED THE SCOPE OF AFCCA'S REMAND WHEN HE REFERRED APPELLANT'S CASE TO AN "OTHER" TRIAL UNDER R.C.M. 1107(e)(2) FOLLOWING AFCCA'S ORIGINAL REMAND DECISION.

 

Orders Granting Petition for Review

 

No. 16-0753/AR. U.S. v. Taylor A. Layton. CCA 20150260. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the following issues:

 

I.   WHETHER ACCEPTANCE OF APPOINTMENT AS A CMCR JUDGE TERMINATED THE MILITARY COMMISSIONS OF JUDGE HERRING AND JUDGE BURTON.

 

II.  WHETHER, AS APPOINTED JUDGES OF THE CMCR, JUDGE HERRING AND JUDGE BURTON DO NOT MEET THE UCMJ DEFINITION OF APPELLATE MILITARY JUDGES.

 

III. WHETHER THE ASSIGNMENT OF INFERIOR OFFICERS AND PRINCIPAL OFFICERS TO A SINGLE JUDICIAL TRIBUNAL ITSELF VIOLATES THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE.

 

No briefs will be filed under Rule 25.

 

No. 17-0014/AR. U.S. v. Stephen C. Warren. CCA 20140510. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the following issues:

 

I.   WHETHER ACCEPTANCE OF APPOINTMENT AS A CMCR JUDGE TERMINATED THE MILITARY COMMISSIONS OF JUDGE CELTNIEKS AND JUDGE BURTON.

 

II.  WHETHER, AS APPOINTED JUDGES OF THE CMCR, JUDGE CELTNIEKS AND JUDGE BURTON DO NOT MEET THE UCMJ DEFINITION OF APPELLATE MILITARY JUDGE.

 

III. WHETHER THE ASSIGNMENT OF INFERIOR OFFICERS AND PRINCIPAL OFFICERS TO A SINGLE JUDICIAL TRIBUNAL ITSELF VIOLATES THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE.

 

No briefs will be filed under Rule 25.

 

No. 17-0016/AR. U.S. v. Christopher L. Cottner. CCA 20150733. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the following issues:

 

I.   WHETHER ACCEPTANCE OF APPOINTMENT AS A CMCR JUDGE TERMINATED THE MILITARY COMMISSION OF JUDGE HERRING.

 

II.  WHETHER, AS AN APPOINTED JUDGE OF THE CMCR, JUDGE HERRING DID NOT MEET THE UCMJ DEFINITION OF APPELLATE MILITARY JUDGE.

 

III. WHETHER THE ASSIGNMENT OF INFERIOR OFFICERS AND PRINCIPAL OFFICERS TO A SINGLE JUDICIAL TRIBUNAL ITSELF VIOLATED THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE.

 

No briefs will be filed under Rule 25.

 

No. 17-0017/AR. U.S. v. Jasmine S. Hercules. CCA 20150197. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the following issues:

 

I.   WHETHER ACCEPTANCE OF APPOINTMENT AS A CMCR JUDGE TERMINATED THE MILITARY COMMISSION OF JUDGE HERRING.

 

II.  WHETHER, AS AN APPOINTED JUDGE OF THE CMCR, JUDGE HERRING DID NOT MEET THE UCMJ DEFINITION OF APPELLATE MILITARY JUDGE.

 

III. WHETHER THE ASSIGNMENT OF INFERIOR OFFICERS AND PRINCIPAL OFFICERS TO A SINGLE JUDICIAL TRIBUNAL ITSELF VIOLATED THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE.

 

No briefs will be filed under Rule 25.

 

No. 17-0021/AR. U.S. v. Alvin S. Banks. CCA 20130948. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the following issues:

 

I.  WHETHER UNITED STATES COURT OF MILITARY COMMISSION REVIEW JUDGE, JAMES W. HERRING, JR., IS STATUTORILY AUTHORIZED TO SIT AS ONE OF THE ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS JUDGES ON THE PANEL THAT DECIDED APPELLANT'S CASE.

 

II. WHETHER JUDGE JAMES W. HERRING, JR.'S SERVICE ON BOTH THE ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS AND THE UNITED STATES COURT OF MILITARY COMMISSION REVIEW VIOLATES THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE GIVEN HIS STATUS AS A SUPERIOR OFFICER ON THE UNITED STATES COURT OF MILITARY COMMISSION REVIEW.

 

No briefs will be filed under Rule 25.

 

No. 17-0038/AR. U.S. v. Christopher B. Smith. CCA 20140353. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the following issues:

 

I.   WHETHER ACCEPTANCE OF APPOINTMENT AS A CMCR JUDGE TERMINATED THE MILITARY COMMISSION OF JUDGE HERRING.

 

II.  WHETHER, AS AN APPOINTED JUDGE OF THE CMCR, JUDGE HERRING DOES NOT MEET THE UCMJ DEFINITION OF APPELLATE MILITARY JUDGE.

 

III. WHETHER THE ASSIGNMENT OF INFERIOR OFFICERS AND PRINCIPAL OFFICERS TO A SINGLE JUDICIAL TRIBUNAL ITSELF VIOLATES THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE.

 

No briefs will be filed under Rule 25.

 

Hearings

 

No. 16-0407/AR. U.S. v. Justin P. Swift. CCA 20100196.

No. 16-0423/AR. U.S. v. Joseph R. Haverty. CCA 20130559.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Tuesday, November 15, 2016

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 17-0076/AF. U.S. v. Jerimia D. Wood. CCA S32346.

No. 17-0077/AR. U.S. v. Salvador Jimenez-Victoria. CCA 20140733.

 

Hearings

 

No. 16-0391/MC. U.S. v. Emmanuel Q. Bartee. CCA 201500037.

No. 16-0418/NA. U.S. v. Jeffrey D. Sager. CCA 201400356.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Monday, November 14, 2016

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 17-0075/AF. U.S. v. James B. Richey. CCA S32362.

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Denied

 

No. 16-0752/AR. U.S. v. Christopher B. Hines. CCA 20131049.

No. 17-0011/AR. U.S. v. Benjamin J. Durham. CCA 20150377.

No. 17-0012/AR. U.S. v. Thomas M. Hanna. CCA 20140934.

No. 17-0015/AF. U.S. v. Dustin B. Wood. CCA 38792.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Thursday, November 10, 2016

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 17-0072/AR. U.S. v. O'Jay R. Woods, Jr. CCA 20150016.

No. 17-0073/AR. U.S. v. William C. Millay. CCA 20130341.

No. 17-0074/AR. U.S. v. Jose L. Nataren. CCA 20130413.

 

Petitions for Reconsideration Granted

 

No. 16-0724/AF. U.S. v. Donald R.B. Simmons. CCA 38788. On consideration of Appellant's petition for reconsideration of this Court's Order issued October 20, 2016, it is ordered that said petition for reconsideration is hereby granted, that the Order of October 20, 2016, denying the petition for grant of review is hereby vacated, and the petition for grant of review is hereby granted on the following issue:

 

WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE ERRED BY INSTRUCTING THE MEMBERS, "IF BASED ON YOUR CONSIDERATION OF THE EVIDENCE, YOU ARE FIRMLY CONVINCED THAT THE ACCUSED IS GUILTY OF THE CRIME CHARGED, YOU MUST FIND HIM GUILTY," WHERE SUCH AN INSTRUCTION IS IN VIOLATION OF UNITED STATES v. MARTIN LINEN SUPPLY CO., 430 U.S. 564, 572-73 (1977), AND THERE IS INCONSISTENT APPLICATION BETWEEN THE SERVICES OF THE INSTRUCTIONS RELATING TO WHEN MEMBERS MUST OR SHOULD CONVICT AN ACCUSED.

 

No briefs will be filed under Rule 25.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Wednesday, November 9, 2016

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 17-0070/AR. U.S. v. Kyle W. Miner. CCA 20160268.

No. 17-0071/AR. U.S. v. Sean D. Thomas. CCA 20150205.

 

Miscellaneous Docket - Filings

 

No. 17-0069/AR. In Re Robert B. Bergdahl, Petitioner. Notice is hereby given that a petition for extraordinary relief in the nature of writ of mandamus was filed under Rule 27(a) on this date.

 

Petitions for New Trial Filed

 

No. 17-0068/AF. U.S. v. Andre K. Lewis. CCA 38671.

 

Orders Granting Petition for Review

 

No. 17-0027/AR. U.S. v. Nicholas E. White. CCA 20140945. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the following issues:

 

I.   WHETHER ACCEPTANCE OF APPOINTMENT AS A CMCR JUDGE TERMINATED THE MILITARY COMMISISON OF JUDGE HERRING.

 

II.  WHETHER, AS AN APPOINTED JUDGE OF THE CMCR, JUDGE HERRING DOES NOT MEET THE UCMJ DEFINITION OF APPELLATE MILITARY JUDGE.

 

III. WHETHER THE ASSIGNMENT OF INFERIOR OFFICERS AND PRINCIPAL OFFICERS TO A SINGLE JUDICIAL TRIBUNAL ITSELF VIOLATES THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE.

 

No briefs will be filed under Rule 25.

 

Interlocutory Orders

 

No. 16-0487/AR. U.S. v. Mario I. Lopez. CCA 20140973. Appellant's motion to file a corrected brief is hereby granted.

 

No. 16-0641/AR. U.S. v. Ian T. Miller. CCA 20150170. Appellee's motion to file a 10-day answer letter out of time is hereby denied.

 

No. 16-0651/AF. U.S. v. Nicole A. Dalmazzi. CCA 38808. Appellant's motion to supplement the record and motion for leave to file a reply to the amicus curiae brief of the United States Army Appellate Government Division are hereby granted.

 

No. 17-0059/AR. U.S. v. Ethan J. Markley. CCA 20140956. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to November 28, 2016.

 

No. 17-0060/NA. U.S. v. Matthew Wilson. CCA 201600194. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to November 28, 2016.

 

No. 17-0061/AR. U.S. v. Michael E. Paradiso. CCA 20150186. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to November 28, 2016.

 

No. 17-0063/AF. U.S. v. Jerry C. Harrison. CCA 38745. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to November 28, 2016.

 

Petitions for Reconsideration Denied

 

No. 16-0613/AR. U.S. v. Bryant K. Marsh. CCA 20120572. Appellant's petition for reconsideration out of time of this Court's order issued on August 15, 2016 is hereby denied.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Tuesday, November 8, 2016

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 17-0066/AR. U.S. v. Marcelino Trejo. CCA 20160479.

No. 17-0067/AR. U.S. v. Anthony K. Bickerstaff. CCA 20160065.

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Denied

 

No. 17-0008/AR. U.S. v. Matthew R. Strempler. CCA 20150527.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Monday, November 7, 2016

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 17-0059/AR. U.S. v. Ethan J. Markley. CCA 20140956.

No. 17-0060/NA. U.S. v. Matthew Wilson. CCA 201600194.

No. 17-0061/AR. U.S. v. Michael E. Paradiso. CCA 20150186.

No. 17-0062/AR. U.S. v. Rick X. Diamon. CCA 20150358.

No. 17-0063/AF. U.S. v. Jerry C. Harrison. CCA 38745.

No. 17-0064/AR. U.S. v. Nathan A. Kelley. CCA 20140701.

No. 17-0065/AR. U.S. v. Cassandra M. Riley. CCA 20150687.

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Denied

 

No. 17-0001/AF. U.S. v. Rudy R. Ruiz. CCA 38752.

No. 17-0007/AF. U.S. v. Joe A. Garcia. CCA 38814.

 

Orders Granting Petition for Review

 

No. 17-0026/AR. U.S. v. Joshua R. Luna. CCA 20150365. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the following issues:

 

I. WHETHER ACCEPTANCE OF APPOINTMENTS AS CMCR JUDGES TERMINATED THE MILITARY COMMISSIONS OF JUDGES HERRING AND BURTON.

 

II. WHETHER, AS APPOINTED JUDGES OF THE CMCR, JUDGES HERRING AND BURTON DO NOT MEET THE UCMJ DEFINITION OF APPELLATE MILITARY JUDGES.

 

III. WHETHER THE ASSIGNMENT OF INFERIOR OFFICERS AND PRINCIPAL OFFICERS TO A SINGLE JUDICIAL TRIBUNAL ITSELF VIOLATES THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE.

 

No briefs will be filed under Rule 25.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Friday, November 4, 2016

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 17-0056/AR. U.S. v. Jodi R. Coker. CCA 20160202.

No. 17-0057/AR. U.S. v. Timothy L. Lawrence. CCA 20150359.

No. 17-0058/AR. U.S. v. Cody D. Young. CCA 20150729.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Thursday, November 3, 2016

 

Orders Granting Petition for Review

 

No. 16-0214/NA. U.S. v. Michael Z. Pabelona. CCA 201400244. On further consideration of the petition for grant of review and the pleadings, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the following additional issue:

 

WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE ERRED WHEN HE INSTRUCTED THE MEMBERS, "IF BASED ON YOUR CONSIDERATION OF THE EVIDENCE, YOU ARE FIRMLY CONVINCED THE ACCUSED IS GUILTY OF THE CRIME CHARGED, YOU MUST FIND HIM GUILTY," WHERE SUCH AN INSTRUCTION IS IN VIOLATION OF UNITED STATES v. MARTIN LINEN SUPPLY CO., 430 U.S. 564, 572-73 (1977), AND THERE IS INCONSISTENT APPLICATION BETWEEN THE SERVICES OF THE INSTRUCTIONS RELATING TO WHEN MEMBERS MUST OR SHOULD CONVICT AN ACCUSED.

 

No briefs will be filed under Rule 25.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Wednesday, November 2, 2016

 

Orders Granting Petition for Review

 

No. 16-0669/NA. U.S. v. Mark A. Berger. CCA 201500024. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the following issue:

 

I.   WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE ABUSED HIS DISCRETION BY GRANTING THE GOVERNMENT'S MOTION TO USE EVIDENCE OF CHARGED SEXUAL MISCONDUCT UNDER MRE 413 TO SHOW PROPENSITY TO COMMIT OTHER CHARGED SEXUAL MISCONDUCT. SEE UNITED STATES v. HILLS, 75 M.J. 350 (C.A.A.F. 2016).

 

II.  WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE ERRED WHEN HE INSTRUCTED THE MEMBERS, "IF BASED ON YOUR CONSIDERATION OF THE EVIDENCE, YOU ARE FIRMLY CONVINCED THE ACCUSED IS GUILTY OF THE CRIME CHARGED, YOU MUST FIND HIM GUILTY," WHERE SUCH AN INSTRUCTION IS IN VIOLATION OF UNITED STATES v. MARTIN LINEN SUPPLY CO., 430 U.S. 564, 572-73 (1977) AND THERE IS INCONSISTENT APPLICATION BETWEEN THE SERVICES OF THE INSTRUCTIONS RELATING TO WHEN MEMBERS MUST OR SHOULD CONVICT AN ACCUSED.

 

No briefs will be filed under Rule 25.

 

Hearings

 

No. 16-0455/AF. U.S. v. Trentlee D. McClour. CCA 38704.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Tuesday, November 1, 2016

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 17-0054/AR. U.S. v. Isaac L. Haywood. CCA 20150146.

No. 17-0055/AR. U.S. v. Mitchell L. Brantley. CCA 20150199.

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Denied

 

No. 16-0760/AR. U.S. v. Shareef S. Abdullah. CCA 20150079.

No. 16-0763/AR. U.S. v. Zachariah P. Morrison. CCA 20160138.

 

Miscellaneous Docket - Filings

 

No. 17-0053/AR. Jeffrey R. Kuntz, Appellant v. United States, Appellee. CCA 20160577. 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 under Rule 27(b) on this date.

 

Miscellaneous Docket - Summary Dispositions

 

No. 17-0029/AF. Clarence Anderson III, Petitioner v. United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals, Respondent. On consideration of the petition for extraordinary relief in the nature of a writ of mandamus, it is ordered that said petition is hereby denied.

 

Orders Granting Petition for Review

 

No. 16-0754/AR. U.S. v. Arthur Martin, Jr. CCA 20130207. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the following issues:

 

I.   WHETHER ACCEPTANCE OF APPOINTMENTS AS CMCR JUDGES TERMINATED THE MILITARY COMMISSIONS OF JUDGES HERRING AND CELTNIEKS.

 

II.  WHETHER, AS APPOINTED JUDGES OF THE CMCR, JUDGES HERRING AND CELTNIEKS DO NOT MEET THE UCMJ DEFINITION OF APPELLATE MILITARY JUDGES.

 

III. WHETHER THE ASSIGNMENT OF INFERIOR OFFICERS AND PRINCIPAL OFFICERS TO A SINGLE JUDICIAL TRIBUNAL ITSELF VIOLATES THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE.

 

No briefs will be filed under Rule 25.

 

No. 16-0758/AR. U.S. v. Jesse M. Taylor. CCA 20150158. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the following issues:

 

I.   WHETHER CMCR JUDGE HERRING IS STATUTORILY AUTHORIZED TO SIT ON THE ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS.

 

II.  WHETHER, EVEN IF CMCR JUDGE HERRING IS STATUTORILY AUTHORIZED TO BE ASSIGNED TO THE ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS, HIS SERVICE ON BOTH COURTS VIOLATES THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE OF THE CONSTITUTION.

 

No briefs will be filed under Rule 25.

 

No. 17-0004/AR. U.S. v. Jason A. Maestre. CCA 20140549. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the following issues:

 

I.   WHETHER ACCEPTANCE OF APPOINTMENT AS A CMCR JUDGE TERMINATED THE MILITARY COMMISSION OF JUDGE HERRING.

 

II.  WHETHER, AS AN APPOINTED JUDGE OF THE CMCR, JUDGE HERRING DOES NOT MEET THE UCMJ DEFINITION OF APPELLATE MILITARY JUDGE.

 

III. WHETHER THE ASSIGNMENT OF INFERIOR OFFICERS AND PRINCIPAL OFFICERS TO A SINGLE JUDICIAL TRIBUNAL ITSELF VIOLATES THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE.

 

No briefs will be filed under Rule 25.

 

Interlocutory Orders

 

No. 17-0048/AR. U.S. v. David J. Dorris. CCA 20140185. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to November 17, 2016.

 

No. 17-0049/MC. U.S. v. Tanner J. Forrester. CCA 201500295. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to November 21, 2016.

 

Hearings

 

No. 16-0229/AF. U.S. v. Ellwood T. Bowen, III. CCA 38616.



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