DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
05-203
Friday, July 29,
2005
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No.
05-0639/MC.
U.S. v. Anthony E.
MONTEBON.
CCA 200401368.
No.
05-0640/AF.
U.S. v. Brandon L.
KEMP.
CCA 35545.
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No.
05-0004/AR.
U.S. v. Kimberly E.
DOBSON.
CCA 20000098. The
motion of Professors Ardath A. Hamann and
Joanne Simboli Hodge to appear pro hac vice, to appear as Amicus
Curiae, for
students to present oral argument, and to exceed page limit granted.
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
05-202
Thursday, July
28, 2005
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED
No.
05-0200/NA.
U.S. v. Cornelius
JONES.
CCA 200000008.
No.
05-0239/AR.
U.S. v. Kenneth M.
BULLOCK.
CCA 20030534.
No.
05-0348/AF.
U.S. v. Clifford D.
MULLINS.
CCA 35489.
No.
05-0554/AF.
U.S. v. Nicole
ANTHONY.
CCA S30690.
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
05-201
Tuesday, July 26,
2005
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No.
05-0636/CG.
U.S. v. Heinz D.
BRIDGES.
CCA 1147.
No.
05-0637/AR.
U.S. v. Shelby D.
SCHNEIDER.
CCA 20050215.
No.
05-0638/AR.
U.S. v. Rick J.
WALLIS.
CCA 20050421.
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No.
05-0047/MC.
U.S. v. Thomas M.
HANEY.
CCA 9900878. Appellant's
motion for extension of time to
file court-ordered brief granted, up
to and including August 22, 2005; and absent
extraordinary circumstances, no further extension of time
will be granted in this case.
No.
05-0447/AF.
U.S. v. Bryan P.
WALSWORTH.
CCA S30592. Appellant's
motion to submit documents
granted.
No.
05-0552/MC.
U.S. v. William R.
HUMPHREY.
CCA 200200787. Appellant's
motion to extend time to file
supplement to petition for grant of review out of time granted to August 18, 2005.
No.
05-0566/NA.
U.S. v. Juse C.
BARROS.
CCA 200201603. Appellant's
motion to extend time to file
supplement to petition for grant of review granted to August 25, 2005.
No.
05-0567/MC.
U.S. v. Joseph
FELICIES.
CCA 9900206. Appellant's
motion to extend time to file
supplement to petition for grant of review granted to August 25, 2005.
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
05-200
Monday, July 25,
2005
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED
No.
05-0472/AR.
U.S. v. William R.
SUESSMAN.
CCA 20040645.
No.
05-0490/AR.
U.S. v. Marcus MAPPS,
Sr.
CCA 20020540.
No.
05-0495/AR.
U.S. v. Andrew C.
GORTON.
CCA 20010900.
No.
05-0496/AF.
U.S. v. Artery D.
LENOIR.
CCA S30161.
No.
05-0522/MC.
U.S. v. Charles C.
ANTHONY.
CCA 200401879.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No.
05-0629/AR.
U.S. v. Albert A.
GEORGE.
CCA 20030308.
No.
05-0630/AR.
U.S. v. George A.
SCALES.
CCA 20021369.
No.
05-0631/AR.
U.S. v. Raul A.
MELO-PEREZ.
CCA 20040777.
No.
05-0632/AR.
U.S. v. Johnnie S.
SANCHEZ.
CCA 20020281.
No.
05-0633/AR.
U.S. v. Brandon L.
SMITH.
CCA 20031300.
No.
05-0634/MC.
U.S. v. Damon G.
JOHNSON II.
CCA 200200401.
No.
05-0635/MC.
U.S. v. Michael R.
WILLIAMS.
CCA 200301248.
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
05-199
Friday, July 22,
2005
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No.
05-0622/AR.
U.S. v. Michael A.
COLEMAN.
CCA 20031257.
No.
05-0623/AF.
U.S. v. Marvin L.
LINDER.
CCA 35401.
No.
05-0624/AF.
U.S. v. Weston D.
INSLEY.
CCA 35651.
No.
05-0625/AF.
U.S. v. Chad E. SCHELLER.
CCA 35664.
No.
05-0626/AF.
U.S. v. Billy C.
SHEPPARD, Jr.
CCA 35656.
No.
05-0627/MC.
U.S. v. Mikki E.
ASHLEY.
CCA 9901546.
No.
05-0628/MC.
U.S. v. Eric W. MYERS.
CCA 200100141.
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
05-198
Thursday, July
21, 2005
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW - OTHER SUMMARY
DISPOSITIONS
No.
05-0510/AF.
U.S. v. Samuel R.
BLEVINS.
CCA 35630. On
consideration of Appellant’s motion to
withdraw from appellate review, which the Court construes as a motion
to
withdraw the petition for grant of review on the basis that it was
prematurely
filed, said motion, as construed by the Court, is granted.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No.
05-0620/AR.
U.S. v. Katara T.
HOLMES.
CCA 20040752.
No.
05-0621/AR.
U.S. v. Matthew G.
ALLEN.
CCA 20040368.
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No.
05-0047/MC.
U.S. v. Thomas M.
HANEY.
CCA 9900878. On
further consideration of the
above-captioned case, it is ordered that the parties will file briefs
addressing granted Issue I. Appellant’s
brief will be filed within 15 days of this order. Appellee’s
answer will be filed within 15
days of the filing of Appellant’s brief.
Appellant may file a reply brief within 5 days of the filing of
Appellee’s answer.
No.
05-0322/MC.
U.S. v. Ronald H.
BARNETT, Jr.
CCA 9901313. Appellee's
motions to file an answer to the supplement
to petition for grant of review out of time and to attach documents are
granted.
No.
05-0400/AR.
U.S. v. Brooke J.
RITTER.
CCA 20010528. Appellant's
motion for leave to file out of
time supplement to petition for grant of review granted.
No.
05-0561/AR.
U.S. v. Sean W.
OLEARY.
CCA 20030491. Appellant's
motion to extend time to file
supplement to petition for grant of review granted to August 19, 2005.
No.
05-0563/MC.
U.S v. Kevin L. SIMON.
CCA 200500094. Appellant's
motion to extend time to file
supplement to petition for grant of review out of time granted to August 19, 2005.
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
05-197
Wednesday, July
20, 2005
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED
No.
05-0214/MC.
U.S. v. Jose S. ORTIZ.
CCA 200200974.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No.
05-0618/NA.
U.S. v. Robert W.
CREIGHTON.
CCA 200201177.
No.
05-0619/NA.
U.S. v. Ernesto G.
CIMMINO.
CCA 200200391.
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No.
05-0445/AF.
U.S. v. Eric J
LEONARD.
CCA 35444. On
consideration of Appellee's motion to
submit an answer in excess of thirty pages to Appellant’s supplement to
the
petition for grant of review, the Court notes that Appellee has also
attached a
Certificate of Compliance indicating that the pleading contains a word
count
within the limits contained in Rule 24(c) of the Court’s Rules of
Practice and
Procedure, rendering the pleading acceptable for filing and the motion
unnecessary. Accordingly, said motion is
denied as moot.
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
05-196
Tuesday, July 19,
2005
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No.
02-0772/NA.
U.S. v. Clyde E. RICHARDSON.
CCA 200000047.*/
No.
05-0616/AR.
U.S. v. Nicholas J.
SCOTT.
CCA 20030825.
No.
05-0617/AR.
U.S.
v. Andrew R. EARLY, III. CCA 20020380.
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No.
04-0698/MC.
U.S. v. Javier A.
MORENO.
CCA 200100715. On
consideration of Appellant's motions to
attach documents filed June 16, 2005 and July 8, 2005, it is ordered
that the
part of the motion filed June 16, 2005, to attach memorandum of the
Director,
Navy-Marine Corps Appellate Defense Division is granted; the motion
filed July
8, 2005, to attach the signed affidavit of Major Anthony C. Williams is
granted; and the part of the motion filed June 16, 2005, to attach the
unsigned
affidavit of Major Anthony C. Williams is denied as moot.
No.
05-0550/MC.
U.S. v. Nicolas REYES.
CCA 200301064. Appellant's
motion to extend time to file
supplement to petition for grant of review granted to August 15, 2005.
No.
05-0551/MC.
U.S. v. Justin M.
LEWIS.
CCA 200200089. Appellant's
motion to extend time to file
supplement to petition for grant of review granted to August 15, 2005.
No.
05-0562/AR.
U.S. v. Scott S.
DAVIS. CCA 20010469. Appellant's
motion to extend time to file
supplement to petition for grant of review granted to August 18, 2005.
MANDATES ISSUED
No.
04-0588/NA.
U.S. v. Stevon J.
TAYLOR.
CCA 200202294.
_______________
*/
Second petition
filed in this case.
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
05-195
Monday, July 18,
2005
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No.
05-0612/AR.
U.S. v. Erin F.
GRAHAM, Jr.
CCA 20040019.
No.
05-0613/AR.
U.S. v. Justin L.
ABRAHAMSON.
CCA 20020841.
No.
05-0614/MC.
U.S. v. Reuben TRUJILLO.
CCA 200001732.
No.
05-0615/NA.
U.S. v. Shawn D.
CROCKETT.
CCA 200201142.
PETITIONS FOR RECONSIDERATION DENIED
No.
04-0588/NA.
U.S. v. Stevon J.
TAYLOR.
CCA 200202294. Appellant's
petition for reconsideration of
the Court’s decision in this case, 61 M.J. 157 (C.A.A.F. 2005), denied.
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No.
05-0464/AF.
U.S. v. Chioke A. A.
J. JONES.
CCA 35365. Appellant's
motion to file pleading in excess
of thirty pages denied; and Appellant will file a supplement to
petition for grant of review that
complies with the limitations in Rule 24 on or before July 28, 2005.
MANDATES ISSUED
No.
04-0178/AR.
U.S. v. Jacques
SAINTAUDE, Jr.
CCA 9801647.
No.
04-0607/AF.
U.S. v. Thomas M.
GORENCE.
CCA S30296.
No.
05-0041/AF.
U.S. v. Terrence A.
BETHEA.
CCA 35381.
DAILY JOURNAL
No. 05-194
Friday, July 15,
2005
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW
DENIED
No.
05-0209/AR.
U.S. v. Jose B.
TEJADA.
CCA 20030191.
No.
05-0327/AF.
U.S. v. Lawrence L. THOMAS.
CCA 35437.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW
FILED
No.
05-0607/AR.
U.S. v. James A. NASH.
CCA 20010800.
No.
05-0608/AF.
U.S. v. Robert E.
RUSH III.
CCA 35856.
No.
05-0609/MC.
U.S. v. Derrick L.
OLIVER.
CCA 200101259.
No.
05-0610/MC.
U.S. v. Lewis L.
BUTLER.
CCA 200000528.
No.
05-0611/MC.
U.S. v. Edwin J.
CHRISTIAN.
CCA 200100734.
DAILY JOURNAL
No. 05-193
Thursday, July
14, 2005
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW
FILED
No.
05-0606/NA.
U.S. v. Eric JOHNSON.
CCA 200301598.
MANDATES ISSUED
No.
03-0568/AR.
U.S. v. Jacqueline
BILLINGS.
CCA 9900122.
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
05-192
Wednesday, July
13, 2005
APPEALS - SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS
No. 04-0157/AF. U.S. v. Frank
SANCHEZ, Jr.
CCA 34940.
On consideration of the petition for grant of
review of the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal
Appeals, said petition is hereby granted and the decision of the United
States
Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed. [See
also ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW
this date.]
ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW
No. 04-0157/AF. U.S. v. Frank
SANCHEZ, Jr.
CCA 34940.
[See also APPEALS – SUMMARY
DISPOSITIONS this date.]
No. 05-0220/AF. U.S. v. Steven L.
CONKLIN.
CCA 35217.
Review granted on the following issues:
I.
WHETHER THE
MILITARY JUDGE ERRED IN ADMITTING EVIDENCE AT TRIAL THAT WAS OBTAINED
AS A
DIRECT RESULT OF AN ILLEGAL SEARCH OF APPELLANT'S PERSONAL COMPUTER.
II.
WHETHER THE
EVIDENCE PRESENTED BY THE PROSECUTION AT TRIAL WAS LEGALLY INSUFFICIENT
TO
SUPPORT APPELLANT'S CONVICTION FOR POSSESSING CHILD PORNOGRAPHY.
No. 05-0266/MC. U.S. v. Thomas A.
CRAWFORD.
CCA 9901590.
Review granted on the following issue:
WHETHER APPELLANT
SUFFERED ILLEGAL PRETRIAL CONFINEMENT IN
VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 13, UNIFORM CODE OF MILITARY JUSTICE, WHEN HE WAS
CONFINED
AT THE BASE BRIG, MARINE CORPS BASE, CAMP LEJEUNE, NORTH CAROLINA, UNDER
CONDITIONS MORE RIGOROUS THAN THOSE REQUIRED TO
ENSURE HIS PRESENCE AT TRIAL BETWEEN HIS ARREST ON 16 OCTOBER 1997 AND HIS
SENTENCING HEARING ON 10 JUNE 1998.
PETITIONS FOR
GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED
No.
05-0318/AF.
U.S. v. Christopher
J. HUDSON.
CCA 35605.
No.
05-0434/MC.
U.S. v. Anthony J.
SALAZAR.
CCA 200401634.
No.
05-0511/AF.
U.S. v. Anthony T.
CLARK.
CCA 35511.
No.
05-0512/AF.
U.S. v. Andrew W.
COLE.
CCA 35644.
No.
05-0513/AF.
U.S. v. Ronald A.
DOBEK.
CCA 35522.
No.
05-0519/AF.
U.S. v. Matthew
MULRAY.
CCA S30410.
No.
05-0543/AR.
U.S. v. John E. CHERE
III.
CCA 20041107.
INTERLOCUTORY
ORDERS
No.
03-0478/AR.
U.S. v. Kenneth M.
KERR.
CCA 20021064. Appellant's
motion to extend time to file
supplement to petition for grant of review granted to August 15, 2005.
No.
05-0288/AR.
U.S. v. Erick ALEMAN.
CCA 20030240. Appellant's
motion to extend time to file a
brief granted, but only
up to and including August 1, 2005; and absent
extraordinary circumstances, no further extension of time
will be granted in this case.
No.
05-0327/AF.
U.S. v. Lawrence L. THOMAS.
CCA 35437. Appellant's
motion to submit document granted.
No.
05-0439/AR.
U.S. v. Edward H.
JOST.
CCA 20030975. Appellant's
motion for leave to file
supplement to petition for grant of review out of time granted.
No.
05-0503/AF.
U.S. v. Cornelius T.
IRVIN.
CCA 35167. Appellant's
motion to submit documents denied.
No.
05-0527/AF.
U.S. v. Jeremy L.
DOUGHERTY.
CCA S30312. Appellant's
motion to submit petition for
grant of review out of time granted; Appellant will file a supplement
to said petition
under Rule 21 on or before August
12, 2005; and Appellee
may file an answer
within thirty days thereafter.
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
05-191
Tuesday, July 12,
2005
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No.
05-0605/NA.
U.S. v. Jeffrey P.
HEISLER.
CCA 200201325.
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
05-190
Monday, July 11,
2005
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No.
05-0602/AR.
U.S. v. Mario LEDESMA.
CCA 20021033.
No.
05-0603/AR.
U.S. v. Vincent J. C.
MARTINEZ.
CCA 20040016.
No.
05-0604/AR.
U.S. v. Nolan D.
WAITHE.
CCA 20030224.
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
05-189
Friday, July 08,
2005
APPEALS - SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS
No. 05-0241/AR. U.S. v. Charlie
McGHAW, III.
CCA 20030342. 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 the petition is granted on the following issue:
WHETHER
THE ARMY COURT ERRED IN CONCLUDING THAT EVEN IF DEFICIENT, A DEFENSE
COUNSEL’S
FAILURE TO CONTACT APPELLANT OR OBTAIN ANY INPUT FROM APPELLANT BEFORE
SUBMITTING A SHORT FORM LETTER TO THE CONVENING AUTHORITY TO CONSIDER
BEFORE
MAKING A CLEMENCY DETERMINATION HAD ABSOLUTELY NO ADVERSE AFFECT ON THE
CONVENING AUTHORITY’S CLEMENCY DETERMINATION.
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 to obtain an
affidavit
from the trial defense counsel responding to Appellant’s allegation of
ineffective assistance of counsel. In
the course of conducting its new review under Article 66(c), Uniform
Code of
Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 866(c) (2000), the Court of Criminal
Appeals
shall review the trial defense counsel’s affidavit and any other
relevant matters. See United States v.
Ginn, 47 M.J. 236
(C.A.A.F. 1997). Thereafter, Article 67,
UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 867 (2000), shall apply.
[See also ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW this date.]
No. 05-0379/AR. U.S. v. Aaron L.
BROKENBOROUGH.
CCA 20040986.
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 the petition is granted on the following issue raised
pursuant
to United States v. Grostefon, 12 M.J. 431 (C.M.A. 1982):
WHETHER APPELLANT
WAS SUBJECTED TO POST-TRIAL CRUEL AND
UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT.
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 to consider the
new
factual matters filed by Appellant with this Court on April 8, 2005.
Thereafter, Article 67, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 867
(2000), shall apply. [See also ORDERS
GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW this date.]
ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW
No. 05-0241/AR. U.S. v. Charlie
McGHAW, III.
CCA 20030342.
[See also APPEALS – SUMMARY
DISPOSITIONS this date.]
No. 05-0379/AR. U.S. v. Aaron L.
BROKENBOROUGH.
CCA 20040986.
[See also APPEALS – SUMMARY
DISPOSITIONS this date.]
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED
No.
05-0232/AR.
U.S. v. Ollie
CHRISTMAS III.
CCA 20031315.
No.
05-0264/AF.
U.S. v. Jason M.
WILLIAMS.
CCA 35350.
No.
05-0265/AF.
U.S. v. David S.
MINOR.
CCA 35231.
No.
05-0347/AF.
U.S. v. Frank R.
TAWNEY, Jr.
CCA 35676.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No.
05-0597/AR.
U.S. v. Paul M.
McCAFFREY.
CCA 20040732.
No.
05-0598/AF.
U.S. v. Dezireno D.
DOUGLAS.
CCA S30582.
No.
05-0599/AF.
U.S. v. Stephanie L.
FENDT.
CCA S30672.
No.
05-0600/AF.
U.S. v. Richard L.
ROEBUCK.
CCA 35203.
No.
05-0601/MC.
U.S. v. Mark W.
MIDLAM.
CCA 200101884.
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No.
05-0471/AR.
U.S. v. Patrick A.
MONETTE.
CCA 20020088. Appellant's
second motion to extend time to file supplement
to petition
for grant of review granted, but only
up to and including July 25, 2005; and absent
extraordinary circumstances, no further extension of time
will be granted in this case.
No.
05-0537/AR.
U.S. v. Scott W.
GREAVER.
CCA 20030971. Appellant's
motion to extend time to file
supplement to petition for grant of review granted to August 8, 2005.
No.
05-0591/MC.
U.S. v. Carlos
MORCIEGO.
CCA 200101789. Motion
of Lieutenant Commander Eric J.
McDonald for leave to withdraw as appellate defense counsel granted.
No.
05-0592/NA.
U.S. v. Michael A.
WHITE.
CCA 200101242. Motion
of Lieutenant Commander Eric J.
McDonald for leave to withdraw as appellate
defense
counsel granted.
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
05-188
Thursday, July
07, 2005
CERTIFICATES
FOR REVIEW FILED
No. 05-5002/MC. U.S. v. Jennifer
N. LONG.
CCA 200201660.
The Judge Advocate General, United States
Navy, requests that action be taken with respect to the following
issues:
I.
WHETHER THE
NAVY-MARINE CORPS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS ERRED WHEN THEY DETERMINED
THAT,
BASED ON THE EVIDENCE ADDUCED AT TRIAL, APPELLEE HELD A SUBJECTIVE
EXPECTATION
OF PRIVACY IN HER E-MAIL ACCOUNT AS TO ALL OTHERS BUT THE NETWORK
ADMINISTRATOR.
II. WHETHER THE
NAVY-MARINE CORPS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS ERRED WHEN THEY DETERMINED
THAT IT
IS REASONABLE, UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES PRESENTED IN THIS CASE, FOR AN
AUTHORIZED USER OF THE GOVERNMENT COMPUTER NETWORK TO HAVE A LIMITED
EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY IN THEIR E-MAIL COMMUNICATIONS SENT AND RECEIVED
VIA THE
GOVERNMENT NETWORK SERVER.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED
No.
05-0336/NA.
U.S. v. Jason R. DUFF.
CCA 200301924.
No.
05-0394/AR.
U.S. v. Willie
WILLIAMS, Jr.
CCA 20030821.
No.
05-0501/AR.
U.S. v. Lavinia Y.
LaFON.
CCA 20000884.
No.
05-0504/AF.
U.S. v. Robert S.
MIDDLEBROOKS.
CCA S30682.
No.
05-0517/AF.
U.S. v. Jim KOVACS.
CCA S30365.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No.
04-0121/AR.
U.S. v. Corey G.
WASHINGTON.
CCA 20030093.*/
No.
05-0596/AR.
U.S. v. Dwayne L.
NICHOLS.
CCA 20020683.
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No.
05-0117/MC.
U.S. v. Brandon T.
RIBAUDO.
CCA 200301672. Appellee's
motion to extend time to file an
answer to final brief granted, up to and including August 12, 2005.
No.
05-0460/AR.
U.S. v. John A.
GONZALEZ.
CCA 20010059. Appellant's
second motion out of time to extend time to file
supplement
to petition for grant of review granted, up
to and including July 22, 2005; and absent
extraordinary circumstances, no further extension of time
will be granted in this case.
No.
05-0535/MC.
U.S. v. Michael C. W.
MROZINSKI.
CCA 200301050. Appellant's
motion to extend time to file
supplement to petition for grant of review granted to August 8, 2005.
_____________
*/
Second petition
filed in this case.
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
05-187
Wednesday, July
06, 2005
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No.
05-0594/AR.
U.S. v. Jeremiah D.
HARDING.
CCA 20020454.
No.
05-0595/AR.
U.S. v. Michelle L.
LORD.
CCA 20030476.
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No.
04-0801/MC.
U.S. v. Jemima HARVEY.
CCA 200001040. Motion
of Major C. R. Zelnis for leave to
withdraw as appellate defense counsel granted.
No.
05-0528/MC.
U.S. v. Michael S.
SNOOK.
CCA 200201598. Appellant's
motion to extend time to file
supplement to petition for grant of review granted to August 4, 2005.
No.
05-0529/MC.
U.S. v. Javier FELIX.
CCA 200200583. Appellant's
motion to extend time to file
supplement to petition for grant of review granted to August 4, 2005.
No.
05-0533/AR.
U.S. v. Willie
PRESCOTT III.
CCA 20020257. Appellant's
motion to extend time to file
supplement to petition for grant of review granted to August 4, 2005.
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
05-186
Tuesday, July 05,
2005
APPEALS - SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS
No. 05-0010/MC. U.S. v. Amy L.
HOLDERMAN.
CCA 200301880.
On further consideration of the granted
issue, 61 M.J. 149 (C.A.A.F. 2005), it is ordered that the decision of
the
United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals is set aside. The record of trial is returned to the Judge
Advocate General of the Navy for resubmission to that court for further
consideration in light of our decision in United States v. Jones,
61
M.J. 80 (C.A.A.F. 2005).
CRAWFORD, Judge (dissenting): I
agree with the Court of
Criminal Appeals
that Appellant’s claim of prejudice was “speculative at best” and she
“fails to
adequately document these employment decisions and to establish their
connection to her lack of a discharge.” United
States v. Holderman, No. 200301880, slip
op. at 2
(N-M Ct. Crim. App. July 29, 2004). See
also United States v.
Jones,
61 M.J. 80, 86 (C.A.A.F. 2005) (Crawford, J., dissenting).
Appellant submitted an affidavit and
indicated while seeking employment with three stores, she was asked “to
submit
a DD-214, or to explain [her] case as part of the application
process.” (Emphasis added). Rather than explaining her case or stating
why the explanation would not be appropriate, she
concluded in her affidavit “I truly
believe my lack of a DD-214 has prevented me from obtaining adequate
civilian
employment to this point in time.”
Unlike
Jones, Appellant has not submitted any evidence from a prospective
employer
that she would have been “seriously considered” for employment if she
had
produced a DD-214. 61
M.J. at 82. Thus, I dissent
because Appellant has not adequately established the required prejudice
to obtain
relief even under the generous principles announced in Jones.1/
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No.
03-0086/AR.
U.S. v. Stanley E. EDMOND.
CCA 19990904.2/
No.
05-0586/AR.
U.S. v. Darron W.
BROWN.
CCA 20010599.
No.
05-0587/AR.
U.S. v. Jeremy P.
USEY.
CCA 20020883.
No.
05-0588/AR.
U.S. v. Michael R.
ANDERSON.
CCA 20041324.
No.
05-0589/AR.
U.S. v. Anthony E.
CRAWFORD.
CCA 20030258.
No.
05-0590/AR.
U.S. v. Alejandro
GOMEZ.
CCA 20040747.
No.
05-0591/MC.
U.S. v. Carlos
MORCIEGO.
CCA 200101789.
No.
05-0592/NA.
U.S. v. Michael A.
WHITE.
CCA 200101242.
No.
05-0593/MC.
U.S. v. Anthony M.
OLIVER.
CCA 200200343.
INTERLOCUTORY
ORDERS
No.
05-0336/NA.
U.S. v. Jason R. DUFF.
CCA 200301924. On
consideration of Appellee's motion to
attach document, it appearing that said document is part of the record
of trial,
said motion is denied as moot.
______________
1/
The Supreme Court has not faced the question
of whether the United States Constitution guarantees a speedy criminal
appeal,
but the federal courts have held that there is such a right. However, absent a showing of actual
prejudice, they have not granted relief.”
61 M.J. at 89 (citing the federal cases
addressing the
issue).
2/
Second petition
filed in this case.
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
05-185
Friday, July 01,
2005
APPEALS - SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS
No. 04-0576/NA. U.S. v. Daniel E.
BRYANT, Jr.
CCA 9901169.
On further consideration of the granted
issue, 61 M.J. 18 (C.A.A.F. 2005), it appears that the United States
Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals rejected the Appellant’s
complaint
of a lack of timely review and affirmed the findings and sentence prior
to the
issuance of United States v. Jones, 61 M.J. 80 (C.A.A.F. 2005),
United
States v. Bodkins, 60 M.J. 322 (C.A.A.F. 2004), and United
States v.
Toohey, 60 M.J. 100 (C.A.A.F. 2004).
Accordingly, it is ordered that the decision of the United
States
Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed as to findings,
but
reversed as to the sentence. The record
is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy for remand to the
Court
of Criminal Appeals for further consideration of the issue of the
timeliness of
appellate review in view of Jones, Bodkins, and Toohey. Thereafter, Article 67(b), Uniform Code of
Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 867(b) (2000), shall apply.
CRAWFORD, Judge (dissenting): The Court of
Criminal Appeals applied the proper
standards for reviewing post-trial delay and did not abuse its
discretion in
denying relief. This case is not akin to
United States v. Bodkins, 60 M.J. 322 (C.A.A.F. 2004). The Court of Criminal Appeals noted that the
failure to object to the delay was one factor to consider as to whether
there
was prejudice in the case. United States v. Bryant, No. NMCCA
9901169, 2004 CCA LEXIS 113, at *17, 2004 WL 784290, at *6 (N-M.
Ct. Crim. App. Apr. 9, 2004).
The court stated, “We would expect an
appellant to object vigorously if he was truly experiencing significant
problems
[prejudice] arising from post-trial processing delays.”
Id.
The court did not employ waiver but rather
used the lack of a complaint as a factor in its decision in refusing to
grant
relief as to post-trial delay.
Appellant, while citing United States v. Tardif, 57 M.J.
219
(C.A.A.F. 2004), did not allege any specific prejudice before the court
below
or this Court. Appellant asked the court
to grant relief under an equity theory even though there was no showing
of
actual prejudice. The court subsequently
stated, “We find no prejudice or harm to the appellant, nor do we
see any
other basis to afford him the requested relief, arising from the
post-trial
processing delay relating to this case.”
2004 CCA LEXIS 113, at *17, 2004 WL 784290, at *6 (emphasis
added). I agree; thus I dissent from
setting aside
the sentence in this case.
ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW
No. 05-0403/AF. U.S. v. John B.
CARY, Jr.
CCA S30146.
Review granted on the following issues:
I.
WHETHER PRESENTING
EVIDENCE TO THE MILITARY JUDGE THAT APPELLANT HAD PREVIOUSLY RECEIVED
NONJUDICIAL PUNISHMENT UNDER ARTICLE 15, UNIFORM CODE OF MILITARY
JUSTICE, WAS
PLAIN ERROR WHEN APPELLANT HAD NOT IN FACT EVER RECEIVED NONJUDICIAL
PUNISHMENT
UNDER ARTICLE 15.
II. WHETHER THE TRIAL
DEFENSE COUNSEL PROVIDED INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL IN
SENTENCING AND
POST-TRIAL PROCESSING BY FAILING TO OBJECT TO THE REFERENCE TO
NONJUDICIAL
PUNISHMENT ON THE PERSONAL DATA SHEET.
Briefs will be filed under Rule 25.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED
No.
05-0315/AR.
U.S. v. Tamika L.
LAWRENCE.
CCA 20030559.
No.
05-0317/AR.
U.S. v. Jason E.
BORTZ.
CCA 20020397.
No.
05-0323/AF.
U.S. v. John T.
SCHEPPER.
CCA 35416.
No.
05-0332/AF.
U.S. v. Charles W.
ODOM.
CCA 35478.
No.
05-0334/NA.
U.S. v. Philip F.
DOYLE.
CCA 200100157.
No.
05-0375/AF.
U.S. v. Steven J.
MCBEE II.
CCA 35346.
No.
05-0388/AF.
U.S. v. Joseph L.
WILSON.
CCA S30301.
No.
05-0451/AR.
U.S. v. Kenneth L.
SHIEL.
CCA 20040415.
No.
05-0469/CG.
U.S. v. George P.
MONGROO.
CCA 1204.
No.
05-0488/AF.
U.S. v. Tyree A.
ROBINSON.
CCA S30595.
No.
05-0524/AR.
U.S. v. Laverne COOK.
CCA 20040792.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No.
04-0113/AF.
U.S. v. Rodriguez L. MEDINA.
CCA 34783.1/
No.
05-0585/AF.
U.S. v. William W.
WHEELER, Jr.
CCA S30433.
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No.
05-0157/NA.
U.S. v. Ivor G. LUKE.
CCA 200000481. Motion
of appellate defense counsel to
withdraw and notice of appearance of new counsel granted.
No.
05-0523/NA.
U.S. v. Rocky R. VOGT.
CCA 200401217. Appellant's
motion to extend time to file
supplement to petition for grant of review granted to August 1, 2005.
____________
1/ Second petition filed
in this
case.