YOU ARE HERE: > HOME > BRIEFS OF GRANTED CASES WITHOUT A HEARING DATE

BRIEFS OF GRANTED CASES WITHOUT A HEARING DATE
(Last Updated 4/15/2026)

In descending order, the following cases have been granted by this Court and ordered to file briefs. These cases have not yet been scheduled for hearings. Links to the briefs are provided soon after the briefs have been filed at this Court. Cases will be removed when a hearing date has been scheduled -- see Hearing Calendar or Archived Hearing Calendars-- or when summary disposition order has been published in the daily journal.

See Daily Journal for complete court proceedings.

---

Thursday, April 9, 2026

Order Granting Petition for Review

 

No. 26-0109/AR. U.S. v. Sherwood E. Reed. CCA 20240321. 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 granted on the following issue:

 

WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE ERRED WHEN HE DENIED THE DEFENSE'S MOTION TO DISMISS APPELLANT'S DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CONVICTIONS FOR SPECIFICATIONS 4 AND 6 OF THE CHARGE AS MULTIPLICIOUS.

 

Supplement brief       No reply brief

Appellant's brief       Appellee's brief       Appellant's reply brief

---

Wednesday, March 25, 2026

Order Granting Petition for Review

 

No. 26-0122/AR. U.S. v. Daniel J. Valdez. CCA 20220274. 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. WHAT IS THE PROPER STANDARD OF REVIEW FOR THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES WHEN REVIEWING THE DECISION OF A COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS IN GRANTING OR DENYING RELIEF FOR EXCESSIVE POST-TRIAL DELAY USING ITS POWER UNDER ARTICLE 66(d)(2), UCMJ?

 

II. WHETHER APPELLANT IS ENTITLED TO RELIEF FOR 952 DAYS OF POST-TRIAL DELAY WHERE THE GOVERNMENT AGREED APPELLANT'S SENTENCE SHOULD BE SET ASIDE.

 

Supplement brief       No reply brief

Appellant's brief       Appellee's brief       Appellant's reply brief

---

Monday, March 9, 2026

Order Granting Petition for Review

 

No. 26-0093/MC. U.S. v. Nathan M. Rivera. CCA 202400304. 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:

 

DID THE MILITARY JUDGE ABUSE HIS DISCRETION IN DENYING THE DEFENSE MOTION TO SUPPRESS APPELLANT'S STATEMENTS TO NCIS?

 

Supplement brief       No reply brief

Appellant's brief       Appellee's brief       Appellant's reply brief

---

Thursday, February 26, 2026

Certificate for Review

 

No. 26-0138/NA. United States, Appellant v. Levani J. Eneliko, Appellee. CCA 202400058. Notice is given that a certificate for review of the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals was filed under Rule 22 on this date on the following issue:

 

DID THE LOWER COURT ERR IN REVERSING THE MILITARY JUDGE ON THE BASIS OF UNITED STATES V. MOTT?

 

Appellant's brief       Appellee's brief       Appellant's reply brief

---

Monday, December 29, 2025

Certificate for Review

 

No. 26-0077/AF. U.S. v. Vidarr Slayton. CCA 40583. Notice is 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 issues:

 

I. DID THE AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS ERR BY FINDING APPELLEE'S CONVICTION FACTUALLY INSUFFICIENT, IN PART, BASED ON MISTAKE OF FACT AS TO CONSENT, WHEN

APPELLEE DID NOT IDENTIFY OR ARGUE MISTAKE OF FACT AS TO CONSENT AS A SPECIFIC DEFICIENCY IN PROOF IN HIS APPEAL?

 

II. DID THE AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS ERR IN APPLYING UNITED STATES v. MENDOZA, 85 M.J. 213 (C.A.A.F. 2024) TO FIND APPELLEE'S SEXUAL ASSAULT CONVICTION FACTUALLY INSUFFICIENT?

 

III. DID THE AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS ABUSE ITS DISCRETION BY FAILING TO GIVE APPROPRIATE DEFERENCE TO THE FACT THAT THE TRIAL COURT SAW AND HEARD THE WITNESSES AND OTHER EVIDENCE?

 

Appellant's brief       Appellee's brief       Appellant's reply brief

---

Friday, May 30, 2025

Order Granting Petition for Review

 

No. 25-0081/AR. U.S. v. Jerome J. Forrest. CCA 20200715. 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 AN APPELLATE JUDGE ON TERMINAL LEAVE IMPERMISSIBLY PARTICIPATED IN A DECISION OF THE UNITED STATES ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS.

 

* Judge Maggs is recused and did not participate.

 

Supplement brief       Answer brief