UNITED
STATES
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
05-184
APPEALS – SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS
No. 05-0199/AR.
WHETHER
APPELLANT RECEIVED INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL WHEN HIS DEFENSE
COUNSEL
FAILED TO: (1) ALLOW HIM THE OPPORTUNITY TO SUBMIT MATTERS WITH HIS
CLEMENCY PETITION;
AND (2) CONSULT WITH HIM REGARDING THE MATTERS THAT DEFENSE COUNSEL
INTENDED TO
SUBMIT IN THAT PETITION AND THE SPECIFIC RELIEF HE INTENDED TO REQUEST
ON
APPELLANT'S BEHALF.
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
ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW
No. 05-0199/AR.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED
No.
05-0184/AR.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No.
05-0583/NA.
No.
05-0584/MC.
MISCELLANEOUS DOCKET - SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS
Misc.
No. 05-8033/NA.
Darryl S. PHILLIPS, Petitioner, v. Commanding General, Marine
Corps
Base,
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No.
05-0157/NA.
UNITED
STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
05-183
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF
REVIEW DENIED
No. 05-0343/AF.
No. 05-0358/AR.
No. 05-0377/AR.
No. 05-0409/AR.
No. 05-0410/AR.
No. 05-0414/AR.
No. 05-0435/NA.
No. 05-0454/AR.
No. 05-0458/MC.
No. 05-0470/AR.
No. 05-0474/AR.
No. 05-0480/AF.
No. 05-0492/MC.
No. 05-0502/AR.
No. 05-0534/AR.
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No. 05-0004/AR.
Appellee's motion
to exceed page length granted.
No. 05-0532/AR.
Appellant's
motion to extend time to file supplement
to the petition for grant of review granted to
UNITED
STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
05-182
APPEALS - SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS
No. 04-0494/AF.
ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW
No. 04-0494/AF.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED
No. 05-0156/NA.
No. 05-0207/AR.
No. 05-0217/NA.
No. 05-0344/AF.
No. 05-0392/NA.
No. 05-0475/AF.
No. 05-0484/AF.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No. 05-0581/AR.
No. 05-0582/AR.
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No. 03-0072/AF.
motion to submit
documents granted
with respect to the documents in Appendix C, but denied with respect to
the
documents in Appendix A and Appendix B.
No. 05-0366/MC.
No. 05-0382/NA.
I.
IF A
SERVICE MEMBER HAS EXECUTED A POWER OF ATTORNEY REGARDING APPELLATE
RIGHTS:
A. WHAT EFFECT,
IF ANY,
SHOULD THIS COURT GIVE TO THE PROVISIONS IN A POWER OF ATTORNEY THAT
PROVIDE
FOR APPELLATE DEFENSE COUNSEL TO:
(1) ACCEPT
SERVICE OF THE DECISION
OF THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS FOR PURPOSES OF STARTING THE 60-DAY
TIME
PERIOD FOR FILING A PETITION FOR REVIEW UNDER ARTICLE 67(b), UCMJ, 10
U.S.C. §
867(b) (2000)?
(2) DECIDE
WHETHER
TO FILE A PETITION FOR REVIEW OR TO WAIVE THE RIGHT TO PETITION THIS
COURT FOR
REVIEW UNDER ARTICLE 67(a)(3), UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 867(a)(3) (2000)?
B. UNDER WHAT
CIRCUMSTANCES,
IF ANY, MAY APPELLATE COUNSEL APPOINTED UNDER ARTICLE 70, UCMJ, 10
U.S.C. § 870
(2000) DECIDE TO NOT PETITION THIS COURT
FOR REVIEW UNDER ARTICLE 67, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 867 (2000) WITHOUT
ATTEMPTING
FIRST TO CONTACT APPELLANT?
II. WHEN A SERVICE
MEMBER HAS EXECUTED A
POWER OF ATTORNEY REGARDING APPELLATE RIGHTS, AND APPELLATE DEFENSE
COUNSEL IS
UNABLE TO CONTACT APPELLANT, UNDER WHAT CIRCUMSTANCES, IF ANY, MAY
COUNSEL
DECIDE TO FOREGO FILING ANY PETITION, INCLUDING A “MERITS” PETITION?
III. WHAT ARE AN
APPELLATE
DEFENSE COUNSEL’S RESPONSIBILITIES TO APPELLANT ONCE COUNSEL HAS BEEN
SERVED
WITH THE DECISION OF THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
A. WHEN A POWER
OF ATTORNEY
REGARDING APPELLATE RIGHTS HAS BEEN EXECUTED BY APPELLANT?
B. WHEN THERE IS
NO SUCH
POWER OF ATTORNEY?
IV. IF A PETITION IS FILED OUT OF TIME UNDER
ARTICLE 67(b), UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 867(b) (2000), IS APPELLANT REQUIRED
TO SET
FORTH THE SPECIFIC FACTS DEMONSTRATING GOOD CAUSE FOR A LATE FILING?
A. IF APPELLANT
WISHES TO
MAKE A LATE FILING, AND SUCH FACTS INVOLVE ATTORNEY-CLIENT
COMMUNICATIONS, MAY
COUNSEL DISCLOSE THOSE FACTS TO THE COURT WITHOUT VIOLATING THE
ATTORNEY-CLIENT
PRIVILEGE?
B. IF THERE
APPEARS
TO BE A COLORABLE CLAIM OF INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF APPELLATE DEFENSE
COUNSEL,
OR IF COUNSEL’S INTERESTS ARE OTHERWISE POTENTIALLY ADVERSE TO
APPELLANT’S,
SHOULD THE JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL APPOINT ANOTHER APPELLATE DEFENSE COUNSEL TO
REPRESENT APPELLANT WITH RESPECT TO THE
MATTER OF THE UNTIMELY FILING?
Appellant’s brief
is due
within 30 days of the date of this order; Appellee’s brief is due within 30 days
of the filing of Appellant’s brief.
The Chiefs of the
Appellate
Defense and Appellate Government Divisions of the United States Army,
United
States Air Force, and United States Coast Guard are invited to file
amicus
curiae briefs on the above issues under Rule 26 of the Court’s Rules of
Practice and Procedure.
No. 05-0509/AR.
No. 05-8034/NA.
UNITED
STATES
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
05-181
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF
REVIEW FILED
No.
05-0571/AR.
No.
05-0572/AR.
No.
05-0573/AR.
No.
05-0574/AR.
No.
05-0575/AF.
No.
05-0576/AF.
No.
05-0577/AF.
No.
05-0578/AF.
No.
05-0579/AF.
No.
05-0580/AF.
MISCELLANEOUS DOCKET - FILINGS
Misc.
No. 05-8034/NA. Russell B.
MULLINS, Petitioner, v.
Judges of the Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals, Respondents.
CCA 200200988. Notice is hereby given that a petition for
extraordinary relief was filed under Rule 27(a) on May 19, 2005, and
placed on
the docket this date.
Misc.
No. 05-8035/AR.
Michael L. BAKER, Petitioner, v.
UNITED
STATES
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
05-180
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF
REVIEW FILED
No.
05-0566/NA.
No.
05-0567/MC.
No.
05-0568/AF.
No.
05-0569/AF.
No.
05-0570/AF.
UNITED
STATES
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
05-179
MISCELLANEOUS DOCKET - FILINGS
Misc.
No. 05-8033/NA. Darryl S.
PHILLIPS, Petitioner, v. Commanding
General, Marine Corps Base,
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No.
04-0578/AR.
Appellant's
motion
to extend time to file brief granted, up
to and including
No.
05-0433/NA.
Appellant's second motion to extend time to
file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted, up to and including
UNITED
STATES
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
05-178
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED
No.
05-0243/MC.
No.
05-0325/NA.
No.
05-0465/AF.
No.
05-0493/MC.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No.
05-0565/AR.
MANDATES ISSUED
No.
04-0284/AF.
No.
04-0382/AF.
UNITED
STATES
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
05-177
ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW
No. 05-0077/AF.
I.
WHETHER THE
EVIDENCE WAS LEGALLY SUFFICIENT TO CONVICT APPELLANT OF SPECIFICATIONS
2, 3,
AND 4 OF CHARGE I (VIOLATION OF A DIRECTIVE PROHIBITING SEXUAL
HARASSMENT)
BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.
II. WHETHER AIR
EDUCATION AND TRAINING INSTRUCTION 36-2002,
III. WHETHER THE
MILITARY JUDGE ERRED WHEN SHE ADMITTED,
OVER DEFENSE OBJECTION, A PROSECUTION EXHIBIT OFFERED AS SENTENCING
AGGRAVATION
EVIDENCE THAT ARGUED AIR FORCE CORE VALUES AND ENDORSED "HARSH ADVERSE
ACTION" FOR THOSE WHO COMMITTED APPELLANT'S OFFENSES.
Briefs
will be filed under Rule 25.
No. 05-0211/AR.
WHETHER
THE MILITARY JUDGE COMMITTED ERROR WHEN HE FAILED TO FIND THE
SPECIFICATION OF
CHARGE II (FALSE OFFICIAL STATEMENT) MULTIPLICIOUS WITH SPECIFICATIONS
1, 3 AND
5 OF CHARGE III (MAKING AND USING FALSE WRITINGS IN CONNECTION WITH A
CLAIM).
Briefs
will be filed under Rule 25.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED
No.
05-0161/MC.
No.
05-0273/AR.
No.
05-0413/AR.
No.
05-0483/AR.
UNITED
STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
05-176
ORDERS
GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW
No. 05-0136/AF.
I. WHETHER
THE MILITARY JUDGE ERRED IN FAILING TO SUPPRESS APPELLANT'S STATEMENTS
TO THE FAMILY ADVOCACY PROVIDER WHERE THOSE STATEMENTS WERE MADE IN
RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS POSED WITHOUT AN ARTICLE 31, UNIFORM CODE OF
MILITARY JUSTICE, RIGHTS ADVISEMENT.
II. IF SO, WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE ERRED IN
FAILING TO SUPPRESS ALL EVIDENCE DERIVED FROM APPELLANT'S STATEMENT TO
THE FAMILY ADVOCACY PROVIDER BECAUSE AFOSI DID NOT GIVE APPELLANT A
CLEANSING WARNING PRIOR TO ITS INTERROGATION OF APPELLANT.
III. DID THE
PROSECUTION PRESENT LEGALLY SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE THAT APPELLANT'S
POSSESSION OF VISUAL DEPICTIONS OF NUDE MINORS WAS SERVICE-DISCREDITING
OR PREJUDICIAL TO GOOD ORDER AND DISCIPLINE?
Briefs will be
filed under Rule 25.
PETITIONS
FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No. 05-0561/AR.
No. 05-0562/AR.
No. 05-0563/MC.
No. 05-0564/NA.
INTERLOCUTORY
ORDERS
No. 05-0406/NA.
No. 05-0426/AR.
No. 05-0440/AR.
UNITED
STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
05-175
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED
No. 04-0560/AR.
No. 05-0187/AR.
No. 05-0196/AR.
No. 05-0211/AR.
No. 05-0370/AF.
No. 05-0385/AR.
No. 05-0399/AR.
No. 05-0401/AR.
No. 05-0425/AR.
No. 05-0432/MC.
No. 05-0438/NA.
No. 05-0442/AR.
No. 05-0448/AR.
No. 05-0494/AR.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No. 05-0553/MC.
No. 05-0554/AF.
No. 05-0555/AF.
No. 05-0556/AF.
No. 05-0557/AF.
No. 05-0558/AF.
No. 05-0559/AF.
No. 05-0560/AR.
MISCELLANEOUS DOCKET - SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS
Misc. No.
05-8032/NA.
Jesse C. SCOTT, Petitioner, v.
MISCELLANEOUS DOCKET - FILINGS
Misc. No.
05-8032/NA.
Jesse C. SCOTT, Petitioner, v.
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No. 04-0428/AF.
I. AS
APPELLANT’S RECORD OF TRIAL DOES NOT CONTAIN EXPERT TESTIMONY ON THE
ACTUAL OR VIRTUAL NATURE OF THE SUBJECTS OF PHOTOGRAPHIC OR ELECTRONIC
IMAGES, DOES THE FACT-FINDING AUTHORITY OF THE AIR FORCE COURT OF
CRIMINAL APPEALS PERMIT THAT COURT TO DETERMINE, IN LIGHT OF ALL OTHER
EVIDENCE, WHETHER THE IMAGES THEMSELVES DEPICT “ACTUAL” CHILDREN,
SUFFICIENT TO SUPPORT APPELLANT’S CONVICTION BASED ON TITLE 18 U.S.C. §
2252A.
II. WHETHER THE AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
CAN REVIEW THE IMAGES OF ALLEGED CHILD PORNOGRAPHY AND AFFIRM THE
FINDINGS OF GUILTY OF SPECIFICATION 1 OF CHARGE II (POSSESSION OF CHILD
PORNOGRAPHY IN VIOLATION OF 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(5)(B)) WHERE THE
MILITARY JUDGE AS TRIER OF FACT APPLIED A DEFINITION OF CHILD
PORNOGRAPHY THAT WAS, IN PART, UNCONSTITUTIONAL, AND THE GENERAL
FINDING OF GUILT DOES NOT INFORM THE REVIEWING COURT WHICH, IF ANY, OF
THE IMAGES THE FINDER OF FACT FOUND TO BE “VIRTUAL” VERSUS “ACTUAL”
CHILDREN.
III. WHETHER THE
AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS ERRED WHEN IT REVIEWED CERTAIN
IMAGES OF ALLEGED CHILD PORNOGRAPHY AND AFFIRMED APPELLANT’S CONVICTION
FOR POSSESSING CHILD PORNOGRAPHY UPON ITS OWN CONCLUSION THAT THE
IMAGES WERE OF “REAL” CHILDREN WHERE APPELLANT DID NOT HAVE THE
OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT A DEFENSE AGAINST THE LIMITED CONSTITUTIONAL
DEFINITION OF CHILD PORNOGRAPHY.
IV. WHETHER THE AIR
FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS ERRED WHEN IT REVIEWED CERTAIN IMAGES
OF ALLEGED CHILD PORNOGRAPHY AND AFFIRMED APPELLANT’S CONVICTION FOR
POSSESSING CHILD PORNOGRAPHY UPON ITS OWN CONCLUSION THAT THE IMAGES
WERE OF “REAL” CHILDREN, THEREBY REMOVING THE GOVERNMENT’S BURDEN OF
PROVING THAT THE IMAGES WERE OF ACTUAL AND NOT VIRTUAL CHILDREN BEYOND
A REASONABLE DOUBT IN A TRIAL FORUM WHERE THE GOVERNMENT’S EVIDENCE
WOULD BE SUBJECT TO CONFRONTATION AND CROSS-EXAMINATION.
Appellant’s brief
will be filed within 30 days of the date of this Order.
Appellee’s brief will be filed within 30 days of the date of the
filing of Appellant’s brief.
No. 05-0174/MC.
No. 05-0243/MC.
No. 05-0311/AF.
No. 05-0490/AR.
UNITED
STATES
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
05-174
ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW
No. 05-0195/AF.
I.
WHETHER APPELLANT'S ADMISSION THAT HIS
POSSESSION OF "CHILD PORNOGRAPHY" WAS SERVICE DISCREDITING WAS
KNOWING AND VOLUNTARY IN LIGHT OF THE FACT THAT HE WAS PROVIDED AN
UNCONSTITUTIONALLY OVERBROAD DEFINITION OF "CHILD PORNOGRAPHY."
II.
WHETHER THE EVIDENCE IS LEGALLY SUFFICIENT
TO SUSTAIN APPELLANT'S CONVICTION FOR TAKING INDECENT LIBERTIES WITH
[CMR] AND
[LNR] AND FOR HAVING THEM ENGAGE IN SEXUALLY EXPLICIT CONDUCT FOR THE
PURPOSE
OF CREATING A VISUAL DEPICTION OF IT.
III.
WHETHER APPELLANT'S CONVICTION FOR VIOLATING 18 U.S.C. § 2251(a) BY
USING A
CAMERA SHIPPED IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE TO PRODUCE SEXUALLY EXPLICIT
PHOTOGRAPHS
OF [CMR], [LNR] AND [SKA] SHOULD BE DISMISSED IN LIGHT OF HIS
CONVICTIONS FOR
COMMITTING INDECENT LIBERTIES WITH [CMR], [LNR] AND [SKA] FOR TAKING
THE
IDENTICAL PHOTOGRAPHS.
Briefs
will be filed under Rule 25.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No.
05-0550/MC.
No.
05-0551/MC.
No.
05-0552/MC.
MANDATES ISSUED
No.
04-0240/AR.
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
05-173
APPEALS - SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS
No. 04-0707/MC.
Accordingly, the decision of the United
States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed.
CRAWFORD,
Judge (dissenting in part and concurring in the result):
I concur in the result only. See my
separate opinion in United
States v. Mizgala, 61 M.J. 122,
130-31 (C.A.A.F. 2005).
ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW
No. 05-0280/AF.
WHETHER APPELLANT
SHOULD HAVE BEEN AWARDED ADDITIONAL
CONFINEMENT CREDIT FOR NONCOMPLIANCE WITH R.C.M. 305, PURSUANT TO UNITED
STATES v. RENDON, 58 M.J. 221 (C.A.A.F. 2003).
Briefs
will be filed under Rule 25.
No. 05-0288/AR.
WHETHER
THE MILITARY JUDGE ERRED IN ACCEPTING APPELLANT'S PLEA OF GUILTY TO
WILLFULLY
SUFFERING THE SALE OF MILITARY PROPERTY (SPECIFICATIONS 1 AND 2 OF
CHARGE II)
WHERE THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE ADDUCED DURING THE PROVIDENCE INQUIRY THAT
APPELLANT HAD ANY INDEPENDENT DUTY TO SAFEGUARD THE MILITARY PROPERTY
IN
QUESTION.
Briefs
will be filed under Rule 25.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No.
05-0549/AR.
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No.
03-0478/AR.
No.
05-0004/AR.
No.
05-0068/NA.
UNITED
STATES
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
05-172
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No.
05-0421/NA.
No.
05-0500/NA.
MANDATES ISSUED
No.
04-0145/AF.
No.
04-0218/MC.
UNITED
STATES
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
05-171
ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW
No. 05-0157/NA.
I.
WHETHER THE
II.
WHETHER THE
Briefs
will be filed under Rule 25.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED
No.
05-0166/NA.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No.
05-0543/AR.
No.
05-0544/AF.
No.
05-0545/AF.
No.
05-0546/AF.
No.
05-0547/AF.
No.
05-0548/NA.
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No.
05-0183/AR.
No.
05-0244/MC.
No.
05-0254/AF.
No.
05-0307/AR.
No.
05-0400/AR.
No.
05-0405/NA.
No.
05-0476/AR.
No.
05-0477/AR.
Appellant's
motion
to extend time to file supplement to petition
for
grant of review granted to
_______________
*/
It is directed that
the
promulgating order be corrected to reflect that the date the sentence
was
adjudged was
UNITED
STATES
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
05-170
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No.
05-0540/AF.
No.
05-0541/AF.
No.
05-0542/AF.
UNITED
STATES
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
05-169
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED
No.
05-6001/MC.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No.
05-0539/AR.
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No.
03-0072/AF.
No.
05-0396/AR.
No.
05-0471/AR.
UNITED
STATES
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
05-168
APPEALS - SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS
No. 04-0069/MC.
ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW
No. 04-0069/MC.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED
No.
04-0711/MC.
No.
05-0291/AR.
No.
05-0335/NA.
No.
05-0371/AF.
No.
05-0378/AR.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No.
05-0537/AR.
No.
05-0538/AR.
UNITED
STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
05-167
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No. 05-0536/AR.
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No. 04-0246/AR.
No. 05-0103/MC.
No. 05-0379/AR.
No. 05-0446/AF.
No. 05-0460/AR.
MANDATES ISSUED
No. 04-0723/NA.
UNITED
STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
05-166
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No. 98-0146/AF.
No. 05-0531/AR.
No. 05-0532/AR.
No. 05-0533/AR.
No. 05-0534/AR.
No. 05-0535/MC.
____________
*/
Third petition filed
in this
case.
UNITED
STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
05-165
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No. 05-0530/AR.
UNITED
STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
05-164
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED
No. 03-0590/AR.
No. 05-0349/AF.
No. 05-0368/AF.
No. 05-0397/AF.
No. 05-0407/AF.
No. 05-0467/AF.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No. 05-0527/AF.
No. 05-0528/MC.
No. 05-0529/MC.
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No. 05-0457/AR.
No. 05-0464/AF.
No. 05-0527/AF.
UNITED
STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
05-163
APPEALS – SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS
No. 05-0139/MC.
(1) whether Appellant was
entitled to financial compensation or other relief under Article 58b(c)
or otherwise
as a result of the remission of the adjudged bad-conduct discharge by
the
convening authority; and, if so, the
duration and
amount of such compensation or other relief;
(2) whether Appellant was
entitled to financial compensation or other relief under Article 58b(c)
or
otherwise as a result of the decision of the Court of Criminal Appeals
to
approve a sentence that did not include a bad-conduct discharge; and,
if so:
(a) the duration and amount of such compensation or
other relief;
and
(b) whether such
compensation or other relief was in
addition to any compensation or other relief to which Appellant was
entitled
under item (1); and
(3) such other
matters as the court deems
appropriate with respect to the form of relief warranted in this case
under United
States v. Tardif, 57 M.J. 219 (C.A.A.F. 2002).
Accordingly, it
is, ordered
that the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of
Criminal
Appeals is set aside. The record is
returned to the Judge Advocate General for remand to that court. Thereafter, Article 67(b), UCMJ, 10 U.S.C.
867(b) (2000), shall apply.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED
No. 05-0292/AR.
No. 05-0298/NA.
No. 05-0305/AR.
No. 05-0306/AR.
No. 05-0333/NA.
No. 05-0339/MC.
No. 05-0355/AR.
No. 05-0360/AR.
No. 05-0383/AR.
No. 05-0398/AR.
No. 05-0402/MC.
No. 05-0412/AR.
No. 05-0422/AR.
No. 05-0449/AR.
No. 05-0450/AR.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No. 05-0524/AR.
No. 05-0525/AR.
No. 05-0526/NA.
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No. 05-0260/AF.
No. 05-0386/AR.
No. 05-0413/AR.
No. 05-0445/AF.
No. 05-0447/AF.
No. 05-0478/NA.
MANDATES ISSUED
No. 04-0291/AR.