UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Tuesday, January 31, 2017

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 17-0216/AR. U.S. v. Luis A. Torres-Garza. CCA 20160142.

 

Orders Granting Petition for Review

 

No. 17-0142/AR. U.S. v. Antione D. Williams. CCA 20130446. 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 JUDGE JAMES W. HERRING, JUDGE ON THE COURT OF MILITARY COMMISSION REVIEW, WAS STATUTORILY AUTHORIZED TO SIT ON THE ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS, AND EVEN IF HE WAS STATUTORILY AUTHORIZED TO BE ASSIGNED TO THE ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS, WHETHER 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. 17-0166/AR. U.S. v. Dustyn R. Kidd. CCA 20150280. 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 JUDGE JAMES W. HERRING, JUDGE ON THE COURT OF MILITARY COMMISSION REVIEW, WAS STATUTORILY AUTHORIZED TO SIT ON THE ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS, AND EVEN IF HE WAS STATUTORILY AUTHORIZED TO BE ASSIGNED TO THE ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS, WHETHER 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.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Monday, January 30, 2017

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 17-0214/AR. U.S. v. Christopher L. Aaron. CCA 20160081.

No. 17-0215/AR. U.S. v. Kevin Greytunkl. CCA 20150644.

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Denied

 

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

No. 17-0140/AR. U.S. v. Kellan D. Mark. CCA 20160301.

No. 17-0152/AR. U.S. v. Michael A. Russell. CCA 20150397.

 

Orders Granting Petition for Review

 

No. 17-0105/AR. U.S. v. Anthony v. Santucci. CCA 20140216. 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. 17-0116/AR. U.S. v. Aarron D. Buckner. CCA 20150323. 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 JUDGES CELTNIEKS AND BURTON, 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 SUPERIOR OFFICERS.

 

No briefs will be filed under Rule 25.

 

Interlocutory Orders

 

No. 16-0663/MC. U.S. v. Travis V. Nauta. CCA 201500244. On consideration of Appellant's motion to supplement the record filed on January 10, 2017, motion to supplement the petition for grant of review, motion to supplement the record filed on January 11, 2017, and motion to supplement the record filed on January 12, 2017, it is ordered that said motions are hereby denied.

 

No. 16-0671/AF. U.S. v. Keanu D.W. Ortiz. CCA 38839. On consideration of the motion filed by the Military Commission Defense Organization for leave to present oral argument as amicus curiae, it is ordered that said motion is hereby granted, and that amicus curiae will be allotted 10 minutes to present oral argument.

 

No. 16-0671/AF. U.S. v. Keanu D.W. Ortiz. CCA 38839. On consideration of the motion filed by the United States Army Government Appellate Division for leave to present oral argument as amicus curiae, it is ordered that said motion is hereby denied.

 

No. 17-0203/AR. U.S. v. David L. Jerkins. CCA 20140071. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to February 15, 2017.

 

No. 17-0204/AR. U.S. v. Joshua A. Marks. CCA 20150428. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to February 15, 2017.

 

No. 17-0205/AR. U.S. v. Kenneth B. Boyd. CCA 20150632. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to February 15, 2017.

 

No. 17-0208/CG. U.S. v. John C. Riesbeck. CCA 1374. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to February 16, 2017.

 

Mandates Issued

 

No. 16-0267/AR. U.S. v. Nathan C. Wilson. CCA 20140135.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Friday, January 27, 2017

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 17-0208/CG. U.S. v. John C. Riesbeck. CCA 1374.

No. 17-0209/AR. U.S. v. Tyre L. Taylor. CCA 20160038.

No. 17-0210/AR. U.S. v. Randon P. Mazzie Jr. CCA 20140923.

No. 17-0211/AR. U.S. v. Sean A. Mecker. CCA 20150533.

No. 17-0212/AR. U.S. v. Craig M. Collins. CCA 20150271.

No. 17-0213/AR. U.S. v. Ahessan H. Ali. CCA 20150366.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Thursday, January 26, 2017

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 17-0201/AR. U.S. v. Donald L. Brown II. CCA 20160241.

No. 17-0202/AR. U.S. v. Austin L. Girau. CCA 20150698.

No. 17-0203/AR. U.S. v. David L. Jerkins. CCA 20140071.

No. 17-0204/AR. U.S. v. Joshua A. Marks. CCA 20150428.

No. 17-0205/AR. U.S. v. Kenneth B. Boyd. CCA 20150632.

No. 17-0206/AR. U.S. v. Liban H. Abdirahman. CCA 20150216.

No. 17-0207/AR. U.S. v. David Montoya. CCA 20150211.

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Denied

 

No. 17-0134/AR. U.S. v. Olanrewaju O. Dairo. CCA 20160213.

 

Petitions Withdrawn

 

No. 17-0117/AR. U.S. v. Benjamin R. Etter. CCA 20150422. Appellant's second motion to withdraw the petition for grant of review without prejudice is hereby granted.

 

Orders Summary Dispositions

 

No. 17-0125/AR. U.S. v. Joshua G. Thomas. CCA 20150393. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals and the record of trial, it is noted that the military judge neglected to seal the transcript of an MRE 412 hearing at pages 49-70 of the record. Accordingly, it is ordered that the petition is hereby granted and that the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed.*

 

* The Clerk of the Court is ordered to seal pages 49-70 of the record of trial.

 

Interlocutory Orders

 

No. 17-0116/AR. U.S. v. Aarron D. Buckner. CCA 20150323. Appellant's motion to attach Appendix C is hereby denied.

 

No. 17-0134/AR. U.S. v. Olanrewaju O. Dairo. CCA 20160213. Appellant's motion to stay proceedings is hereby denied.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Wednesday, January 25, 2017

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 17-0200/AR. U.S. v. Carlos A. Gonzalez-Gomez. CCA 20121100.

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Denied

 

No. 17-0155/AF. U.S. v. Michael L. Merritt. CCA 38819.

No. 17-0156/AF. U.S. v. Joseph R. Scher. CCA S32329.

No. 17-0157/AF. U.S. v. David W. Turner II. CCA S32317.

 

Orders Granting Petition for Review

 

No. 17-0091/AR. U.S. v. Stefan D. Hughes. CCA 20150022. 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 JUDGES CELTNIEKS AND BURTON, 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 SUPERIOR OFFICERS.

 

No briefs will be filed under Rule 25.

 

No. 17-0112/AR. U.S. v. Jason R. Crews. CCA 20130766. 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. 17-0128/AR. U.S. v. Anthony E. Perez. CCA 20160256. 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 JUDGE JAMES W. HERRING, JUDGE ON THE COURT OF MILITARY COMMISSION REVIEW, WAS STATUTORILY AUTHORIZED TO SIT ON THE ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS, AND EVEN IF HE WAS STATUTORILY AUTHORIZED TO BE ASSIGNED TO THE ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS, WHETHER 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.

 

Interlocutory Orders

 

No. 17-0003/AR. U.S. v. Christopher B. Hukill. CCA 20140939. Appellant's motion to supplement the joint appendix is granted.

 

No. 17-0199/AF. U.S. v. Ricky D. Chisum, Jr. CCA S32311. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to February 13, 2017.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Tuesday, January 24, 2017

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 17-0198/AF. U.S. v. Christian F. Gonzalez-Perez. CCA 39028.

No. 17-0199/AF. U.S. v. Ricky D. Chisum, Jr. CCA S32311.

 

Interlocutory Orders

 

No. 17-0139/AR. U.S. v. Justin M. Gurczyski. CCA 20160402. Appellant's motion to extend time to file a reply brief granted to January 30, 2017.

 

No. 17-0153/AR. U.S. v. Edward J. Mitchell II. CCA 20150776. Appellant's motion to extend time to file a reply brief granted to February 10, 2017.

 

No. 17-0196/AF. U.S. v. Paul D. Voorhees. CCA 38836. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to February 13, 2017.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Monday, January 23, 2017

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 17-0194/AR. U.S. v. Dallas R. Sutton. CCA 20150268.

No. 17-0195/AF. U.S. v. Elis M. Lasalle. CCA 38831.

No. 17-0196/AF. U.S. v. Paul D. Voorhees. CCA 38836.

No. 17-0197/AR. U.S. v. Jeffery E. Prewitt. CCA 20160295.

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Denied

 

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

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

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

No. 17-0113/AR. U.S. v. Antonio G. Salazar. CCA 20150611.

No. 17-0136/NA. U.S. v. Jonathan C. Golden. CCA 201600046.

No. 17-0137/AF. U.S. v. Daniel J. Rodgers. CCA 38832.

No. 17-0149/AF. U.S. v. Michael S. Ingram. CCA 38849.

 

Orders Granting Petition for Review

 

No. 17-0095/AR. U.S. v. Marcus V. Davis. CCA 20150100. 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 JUDGE JAMES W. HERRING AND JUDGE PAULETTE V. BURTON, 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.

 

No briefs will be filed under Rule 25.

 

No. 17-0118/AR. U.S. v. Tyrone E. Stanley. CCA 20150772. 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 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.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Wednesday, January 18, 2017

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 17-0192/AR. U.S. v. Jermaine C. Sampson. CCA 20140841.

No. 17-0193/AR. U.S. v. Michael Horton. CCA 20150710.

 

Orders Granting Petition for Review

 

No. 17-0110/AR. U.S. v. Manuel Rios. CCA 20140971. 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 AN 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. 17-0124/AR. U.S. v. Phillip S. Lewis, Jr. CCA 20160329. 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. 17-0129/AR. U.S. v. Khristophor M. Villar. CCA 20160117. 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 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.

 

No briefs will be filed under Rule 25.

 

No. 17-0130/AR. U.S. v. Seddrick M. Rhodes. CCA 20160265. 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 JUDGE JAMES W. HERRING, JUDGE ON THE COURT OF MILITARY COMMISSION REVIEW, WAS STATUTORILY AUTHORIZED TO SIT ON THE ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS, AND EVEN IF HE WAS STATUTORILY AUTHORIZED TO BE ASSIGNED TO THE ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS, WHETHER 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.

 

Interlocutory Orders

 

No. 16-0727/AF. U.S. v. James W. Richards IV. CCA 38346. Appellant's motion to extend time to file a joint appendix granted to January 18, 2017.

 

No. 17-0095/AR. U.S. v. Marcus V. Davis. CCA 20150100. Appellee's motion to seal the supplement to the petition for grant of review is granted.

 

No. 17-0117/AR. U.S. v. Benjamin R. Etter. CCA 20150422. On consideration of Appellant's motion to withdraw the petition for grant of review without prejudice, it is ordered that said motion is hereby denied for lack of compliance with Rule 21(f), Rules of Practice and Procedure.

 

No. 17-0162/NA. U.S. v. Keith Barry. CCA 201500064. Appellant's second motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to February 2, 2017.

 

No. 17-0184/MC. U.S. v. Ronald Montano. CCA 201400230. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to February 2, 2017.

 

No. 17-0187/AR. U.S. v. Brian G. Short. CCA 20150320. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to February 6, 2017.

 

No. 17-0189/AR. U.S. v. Gary S. Oscar. CCA 20140445. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to February 2017.

 

No. 17-0191/NA. U.S. v. Alexey N. Gebert. CCA 201500381. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to February 6, 2017.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Tuesday, January 17, 2017

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 17-0185/AF. U.S. v. Thomas T. Warshaw III. CCA 38907.

No. 17-0186/AF. U.S. v. Christopher N. Allore. CCA 38912.

No. 17-0187/AR. U.S. v. Brian G. Short. CCA 20150320.

No. 17-0188/AR. U.S. v. Tyran M. Alexander. CCA 20150223.

No. 17-0189/AR. U.S. v. Gary S. Oscar. CCA 20140445.

No. 17-0190/AR. U.S. v. Issac G. Aguigui. CCA 20140260.

No. 17-0191/NA. U.S. v. Alexey N. Gebert. CCA 201500381.

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Denied

 

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

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

No. 17-0120/AR. U. S. v. Darreus J. Kemp. CCA 20160214.

No. 17-0126/AF. U.S. v. Austin R. Swanson. CCA 38827.

No. 17-0127/AF. U.S. v. Matthew M.R. Booth. CCA 38850.

 

Petitions for Grant of Review - Summary Dispositions

 

No. 16-0635/AR. U.S. v. Laith G. Cox. CCA 20130923. On further consideration of the granted issues, 75 M.J.457 (C.A.A.F. 2016), the facts that the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals issued its judgment in Appellant's case on April 29, 2016, and Appellate Military Judges Paulette V. Burton and James W. Herring were appointed by the President to the United States Court of Military Commission Review on May 25, 2016, and in light of United States v. Dalmazzi, __ M.J. __ (C.A.A.F. Dec. 15, 2016), it is ordered that the order issued October 3, 2016, granting review is hereby vacated, and that Appellant's petition for grant of review is hereby denied.

 

No. 16-0641/AR. U.S. v. Ian T. Miller. CCA 20150170. On further consideration of the granted issues, __ M.J. __ (Daily Journal Nov. 30, 2016), the facts that the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals issued its judgment in Appellant's case on May 6, 2016, and Appellate Military Judge Larss G. Celtnieks was appointed by the President to the United States Court of Military Commission Review on May 25, 2016, and in light of United States v. Dalmazzi, __ M.J. __ (C.A.A.F. Dec. 15, 2016), it is,  ordered that the order issued November 30, 2016, granting review is hereby vacated, and that Appellant's petition for grant of review is denied.

 

No. 16-0650/AR. U.S. v. Courtney A. Craig. CCA 20150272. On further consideration of the granted issues, 75 M.J. 470 (C.A.A.F. 2016), the facts that the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals issued its judgment in Appellant's case on May 10, 2016, and Appellate Military Judges Paulette V. Burton and James W. Herring were appointed by the President to the United States Court of Military Commission Review on May 25, 2016, and in light of United States v. Dalmazzi, __ M.J. __ (C.A.A.F. Dec. 15, 2016), it is ordered that the order issued October 20, 2016, granting review is hereby vacated, and that Appellant's petition for grant of review is denied.

 

Orders Granting Petition for Review

 

No. 16-0741/AR. U.S. v. Nicholas A. Piszcz. CCA 20140842. On further consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that the Order of January 13, 2017, denying the petition for grant of review is hereby vacated, and 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. 17-0084/AR. U.S. v. James N. Costigan. CCA 20150052. 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 414 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.

 

No. 17-0121/AR. U.S. v. Elvis R. Garcia. CCA 20150715. 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 CELTNIEKS AND BURTON.

 

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

 

Interlocutory Orders

 

No. 16-0599/AR. U.S. v. Jared D. Herrmann. CCA 20131064. In view of the Court's selection of the above-captioned case to be heard as part of Project Outreach at the Claude W. Pettit College of Law at Ohio Northern University on April 5, 2017, and the consent of the parties to the case to be heard on Project Outreach, the Court invites the filing of amicus curiae briefs in support of the Appellant and Appellee by eligible law students acting under supervising attorneys. See Rules 13A and 26(a)(2), Rules of Practice and Procedure. The briefs shall be filed on or before March 22, 2017.

 

No. 16-0671/AF. U.S. v. Keanu D.W. Ortiz. CCA 38839. On consideration of the motion filed by the Military Commission Defense Organization for leave to file an amicus curiae brief in support of neither party, it is ordered that said motion is hereby granted, and that amicus curiae will file a brief on or before January 24, 2017.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Friday, January 13, 2017

Petitions for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 17-0184/MC. U.S. v. Ronald Montano. CCA 201400230.

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Denied

 

No. 16-0741/AR. U.S. v. Nicholas A. Piszcz. CCA 20140842.

No. 17-0122/AF. U.S. v. William L. Wareham. CCA 38820.

 

Interlocutory Orders

 

No. 16-0727/AF. U.S. v. James W. Richards IV. CCA 38346. On consideration of the motion filed by Major Johnathan D. Legg to withdraw as detailed military counsel, it is ordered that said motion is hereby granted.

 

No. 17-0068/AF. U.S. v. Andre K. Lewis. CCA 38671. Appellant's motion for leave to file a joint appendix is granted.

 

No. 17-0156/AF. U.S. v. Joseph R. Scher. CCA S32329. On consideration of Appellant's motion to attach documents and Appellee's motion to for leave to file a 10-day answer letter out of time, it is ordered that said motions are hereby denied.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Thursday, January 12, 2017

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 17-0181/NA. U.S. v. Shane D. Manuel. CCA 201600105.

No. 17-0182/NA. U.S. v. Richard P. Trotter. CCA 201500332.

No. 17-0183/AR. U.S. v. Alan S. Guardado. CCA 20140014.

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Denied

 

No. 17-0119/AR. U.S. v. Jhon C. Jean-Louis. CCA 20150739.

 

Orders Granting Petition for Review

 

No. 17-0049/MC. U.S. v. Tanner J. Forrester. CCA 201500295. 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 PUNISHING THE SAME TRANSACTION OF OBTAINING CHILD PORNOGRAPHY WITH FOUR CONVICTIONS UNREASONABLY EXAGGERATES APPELLANT'S CRIMINALITY AND TRIPLES HIS PUNITIVE EXPOSURE, CONSTITUTING AN UNREASONABLE MULTIPLICATION OF CHARGES.

 

Briefs will be filed under Rule 25.

 

No. 17-0055/AR. U.S. v. Mitchell L. Brantley. CCA 20150199. 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 GOVERNMENT PROVED BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT THAT APPELLANT KNEW OR REASONABLY SHOULD HAVE KNOWN THAT SR WAS "OTHERWISE UNAWARE" OF SEXUAL CONTACT.

 

Briefs will be filed under Rule 25.

 

No. 17-0087/AR. U.S. v. Jameson T. Hazelbower. CCA 20150335. 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 AND 414 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

Wednesday, January 11, 2017

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 17-0178/AR. U.S. v. Michael J. Sadler. CCA 20160300.

No. 17-0179/AR. U.S. v. Eric R. Ramirez. CCA 20140022.

No. 17-0180/AR. U.S. v. Cassandra M. Riley. CCA 20140960.

 

Orders Granting Petition for Review

 

No. 17-0115/MC. U.S. v. Mark A. Tamburello. CCA 201600109. 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.

 

Hearings

 

No. 16-0611/AF. U.S. v. Richard K. Price, Jr. CCA S32330.

No. 16-0530/AF. U.S. v. Patrick A. Shea. CCA S32225.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Tuesday, January 10, 2017

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 17-0175/AR. U.S. v. Christopher Murphy. CCA 20160088.

No. 17-0176/AR. U.S. v. Reginald E. Charles. CCA 20160414.

No. 17-0177/AR. U.S. v. Brian K. Jewell II. CCA 20160464.

 

Interlocutory Orders

 

No. 17-0138/AF. U.S. v. Jason K. Slape. CCA 38801. Appellant's second motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to January 24, 2017.

 

No. 17-0171/CG. U.S. v. Koda M. Harpole. CCA 1420. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to January 27, 2017.

 

Hearings

 

No. 16-0306/AR. U.S. v. Joshua C. Davis. CCA 20130996.

No. 16-0487/AR. U.S. v. Mario I. Lopez. CCA 20140973.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Monday, January 9, 2017

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 17-0172/AR. U.S. v. Zachary S. Richardson-Hoeg. CCA 20150503.

No. 17-0173/AR. U.S. v. Patrick Podobnik. CCA 20150692.

No. 17-0174/AR. U.S. v. Demechea R. Harris. CCA 20160198.

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Denied

 

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

 

Orders Granting Petition for Review

 

No. 16-0475/AF. U.S. v. Nathan G. Wilson-Crow. CCA 38706. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals and the pleadings, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the following issues:

 

I. WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE COMMITTED LEGAL ERROR WHEN HE FOUND THAT SPECIFICATION 2 OF CHARGE I - APPELLANT'S CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE OF A.L. IN VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 120b - CONSTITUTED CHILD MOLESTATION UNDER MIL. R. EVID. 414(d)(2)(a) BECAUSE HE FOUND THAT "CONDUCT PROHIBITED BY ARTICLE 120" INCLUDES ARTICLE 120b OFFENSES.

 

II. WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE ERRED IN INSTRUCTING THE PANEL THAT, PURSUANT TO MRE 413, IT COULD USE OFFENSES IN ADDITIONAL CHARGE I, TO WHICH APPELLANT PLEADED NOT GUILTY, AS PROPENSITY EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF THE REMAINING SPECIFICATIONS OF THAT CHARGE WHICH HE ALSO CONTESTED.

 

III. 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 ANY OFFENSE CHARGED, YOU MUST FIND HIM GUILTY OF THAT OFFENSE," 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.

 

Briefs will be filed under Rule 25 on Issues I and II only.

 

No. 17-0042/AR. U.S. v. Ali A. Alirad, Jr. CCA 20150404. 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 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.

 

No briefs will be filed under Rule 25.

 

No. 17-0081/AR. U.S. v. Eric A. LeRoy. CCA 20160294. 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. 17-0090/AR. U.S. v. Ronnie T. Williams. CCA 20150302. 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 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.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Friday, January 6, 2017

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 17-0171/CG. U.S. v. Koda M. Harpole. CCA 1420.

 

Interlocutory Orders

 

No. 17-0162/NA. U.S. v. Keith Barry. CCA 201500064. Appellant's motion to copy sealed documents for newly-retained civilian counsel granted.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Thursday, January 5, 2017

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 17-0170/AR. U.S. v. Nicholas Doherty. CCA 20160390.

 

Orders Granting Petition for Review

 

No. 16-0497/MC. U.S. v. Reece N. Tso. CCA 201400379. 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 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. 17-0123/AF. U.S. v. Courtney R. Canada. CCA S32298. 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 issue:

 

WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE ERRED WHEN HE TWICE INSTRUCTED THE MEMBERS, "IF, BASED ON YOUR CONSIDERATION OF THE EVIDENCE, YOU ARE FIRMLY CONVINCED THAT THE ACCUSED IS GUILTY OF ANY OFFENSE 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, January 4, 2017

 

Interlocutory Orders

 

No. 17-0168/MC. U.S. v. David R. Rendon. CCA 201500408. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to January 19, 2017.

 

No. 17-0169/AF. U.S. v. Marcus A. Mancini. CCA 38783. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to January 23, 2017.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Tuesday, January 3, 2017

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 17-0169/AF. U.S. v. Marcus A. Mancini. CCA 38783.

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Denied

 

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

 

Orders Granting Petition for Review

 

No. 17-0037/AF. U.S. v. Cory D. Phillips. CCA S38771. 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 MILITARY JUDGE ABUSED HER DISCRETION BY GRANTING THE GOVERNMENT MOTION TO USE EVIDENCE OF CHARGED SEXUAL MISCONDUCT UNDER MIL. R. EVID. 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 LOWER COURT ERRED WHEN IT FAILED TO REMAND APPELLANT'S CASE FOR NEW POST-TRIAL PROCESSING AFTER THE STAFF JUDGE ADVOCATE'S RECOMMENDATION (SJAR) FAILED TO CORRECT AN ERROR IN APPELLANT'S CLEMENCY SUBMISSION. See UNITED STATES v. ADDISON, NO. 16-0615/AF (C.A.A.F. 26 July 2016) (rem.).

 

III. WHETHER APPELLANT'S CONVICTION ON SPECIFICATION 1 OF THE CHARGE IS LEGALLY INSUFFICIENT WHERE THE GOVERNMENT FAILED TO PROVE THAT APPELLANT AND SrA LS ENGAGED IN A SEXUAL ACT.

 

Briefs will be filed under Rule 25.



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