UNITED
STATES
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
09-225
Friday,
July 31, 2009
CERTIFICATES FOR
REVIEW FILED
No. 09-5006/AF.
WHETHER
THE AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS ERRED IN NULLIFYING APPELLEE’S
FACTUALLY
AND LEGALLY SUFFICIENT CONVICTION FOR POSSESSION OF CHILD PORNOGRAPHY.
Appellee
will file an answer regarding the certified issue on or before the 31st
day of August, 2009. Appellant may file
a reply no later than 10 days after the filing of Appellee’s answer.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED
No.
09-0529/AF.
No.
09-0532/MC.
No.
09-0666/AF.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No.
09-0771/MC.
PETITIONS FOR RECONSIDERATION DENIED
UNITED
STATES
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
09-224
Thursday,
July 30, 2009
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No.
08-0344/AR.
No.
09-0380/AF.
No.
09-0693/AR.
No.
09-0694/AR.
No.
09-0695/AR.
No.
09-0696/AR.
No.
09-0704/AR.
MANDATES ISSUED
UNITED
STATES
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
09-223
Wednesday,
July 29, 2009
APPEALS - SUMMARY
DISPOSITIONS
No. 09-0530/AF.
ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW
No. 09-0530/AF.
CERTIFICATES FOR REVIEW FILED
No.
09-5005/AF.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED
No.
09-0006/AR.
No.
09-0313/CG.
No.
09-0371/AR.
No.
09-0436/AR.
No.
09-0481/AR.
No.
09-0524/AF.
No.
09-0540/AR.
No.
09-0546/AF.
No. 09-0573/AR.
No.
09-0595/AR.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No.
09-0766/AF.
No.
09-0767/AF.
No. 09-0768/AF.
No.
09-0769/AF.
UNITED
STATES
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
09-222
Tuesday,
July 28, 2009
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF
REVIEW DENIED
No.
09-0433/AR.
No.
09-0472/AR.
No.
09-0542/AR.
No.
09-0569/AR.
No.
09-0572/AR.
No.
09-0590/AR.
No.
09-0593/MC.
No.
09-0598/AF.
No.
09-0600/AF.
No.
09-0612/AR.
No.
09-0623/AR.
No.
09-0635/AR.
No.
09-0667/AF.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No.
09-0762/AR.
No. 09-0763/AR.
No.
09-0764/NA.
No.
09-0765/MC.
PETITIONS FOR RECONSIDERATION DENIED
UNITED
STATES
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
09-221
Monday,
July 27, 2009
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No.
09-0758/MC.
No.
09-0759/NA.
No. 09-0760/AR.
No.
09-0761/AR.
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
09-220
Friday,
July 24, 2009
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF
REVIEW FILED
No.
09-0754/AF.
No.
09-0755/AF.
No.
09-0756/AR.
UNITED
STATES
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
09-219
Thursday,
July 23, 2009
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED
No.
09-0177/AR.
No.
09-0300/AR.
No.
09-0498/AR.
PETITION FO RECONSIDERATION DENIED
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No.
09-0753/AR.
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No. 09-0010/AR.
MANDATES ISSUED
No. 08-0805/MC.
UNITED
STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
09-218
Wednesday,
July 22, 2009
ORDERS GRANTING
PETITION FOR REVIEW
No.
08-0644/AR.
WHETHER THE
MILITARY JUDGE
ERRED IN DENYING APPELLANT'S MOTION TO SUPPRESS THE EVIDENCE SEIZED
FROM
APPELLANT'S QUARTERS.
Briefs will be
filed under
Rule 25.
No.
09-0252/AF.
WHETHER THE
MILITARY JUDGE
ERRONEOUSLY ACCEPTED APPELLANT'S PLEA OF GUILTY TO WILLFULLY SUFFERING
THE
DAMAGE OF A MILITARY FIRE EXTINGUISHER, AND THE OWER COURT ERRED BY
AFFIRMING
THE FINDING OF GUILTY TO THAT SPECIFICATION.
Briefs will be
filed under
Rule 25.
No.
09-0429/MC.
WHETHER THE
MILITARY JUDGE
ABUSED HIS DISCRETION IN DENYING APPELLANT'S CHALLENGE FOR CAUSE OF
CAPTAIN STOJKA,
CREATING SERIOUS DOUBTS AS TO WHETHER APPELLANT HAD A FAIR AND
IMPARTIAL PANEL
WHERE THE SENIOR MEMBER AND ONE OF HIS SUBORDINATES COMPRISED THE
TWO-THIRDS
MAJORITY SUFFICIENT TO CONVICT APPELLANT.
Briefs will be
filed under
Rule 25.
No.
09-0445/AF.
WHETHER THE
MILITARY JUDGE
ABUSED HIS DISCRETION BY FAILING TO GRANT APPELLANT'S RECUSAL MOTION
UNDER R.C.M.
902(a).
Briefs will be
filed under
Rule 25.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED
No. 09-0430/AF.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No. 09-0751/AF.
No. 09-0752/AR.
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No. 08-0660/NA.
No. 09-0720/MC.
No. 09-5004/NA.
No. 09-8029/AF.
UNITED
STATES
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
09-217
Tuesday,
July 21, 2009
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF
REVIEW DENIED
No.
09-0471/AR.
No.
09-0536/AR.
No.
09-0622/AR.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No.
08-0417/AR.
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No. 08-0344/AR.
No. 09-0466/AF.
No.
09-8019/AR. Joshua A. DIXON, Appellant
v. F.L. Hagenbeck, Lieutenant General, U.S. Army Convening Authority,
and
Andrew J. Glass, Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army, Military Judge, and The
United
States, Appellees. CCA 20090001. Appellant's motion for leave to allow
supplemental briefing and to stay proceedings below denied.
No.
09-6006/MC. Michael R. CROTCHETT. CCA200800770.
On
consideration of the petition for grant of review filed by counsel for
Appellant on June 26, 2009, under Rule 19(a)(5)(B), Rules of Practice
and
Procedure, United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, and
docketed
under Docket Number 09-0703, and it now appearing that said petition is
in fact
a petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States
Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals on appeal
by the United States under Article 62, Uniform Code of Military
Justice, 10
U.S.C. § 862,
it is ordered that Docket Number
09-6006/MC be assigned to this case, and that Docket Number 09-0703/MC
be removed from this case and not be
assigned to any other case. The Clerk of
the Court and counsel for both parties herein will promptly ensure that
the new
docket number assigned to this case be noted on all future pleadings
filed in
this matter.
*
Second petition filed in this case.
UNITED
STATES
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
09-216
Monday,
July 20, 2009
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF
REVIEW DENIED
No.
09-0547/AF.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No.
09-0742/AR.
No.
09-0743/AF.
No.
09-0744/AF.
No.
09-0745/AF.
No.
09-0746/NA.
No.
09-0747/AR.
No.
09-0748/AR.
No.
09-0749/AR.
No.
09-0750/AR.
UNITED
STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
09-215
Friday,
July 17, 2009
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED
No. 09-0592/AR.
No. 09-0629/AR.
No. 09-0641/AF.
No. 09-0649/AF.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW - OTHER SUMMARY
DISPOSITIONS
No. 07-0385/NA.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No. 09-0735/AR.
No. 09-0736/AR.
No. 09-0737/MC.
No. 09-0738/AF.
No. 09-0739/AF.
No. 09-0740/AF.
No. 09-0741/AR.
MISCELLANEOUS DOCKET - FILINGS
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No. 09-0433/AR.
No. 09-0584/AF.
No. 09-0614/MC.
No. 09-0651/AR.
No. 09-0679/AR.
UNITED
STATES
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
09-214
Thursday,
July 16, 2009
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED
No.
09-0461/AF.
No.
09-0517/AR.
No.
09-0527/AF.
No.
09-0548/AR.
No.
09-0638/AF.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No.
09-0731/AR.
No.
09-0732/AR.
No.
09-0733/AR.
No.
09-0734/AR.
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No. 09-0169/AR.
No.
09-0414/NA.
No.
09-0648/AR.
No.
09-0676/AR.
No.
09-0683/AR.
UNITED
STATES
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
09-213
Wednesday,
July 15, 2009
RULES CHANGES
Upon careful
consideration of certain proposed
changes to the Rules of Practice and Procedure, United States Court of
Appeals
for the Armed Forces, which were presented to and reviewed by the Rules
Advisory Committee of the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed
Forces
and thereafter published in the Federal Register for comment, it is
ordered
that effective September 1, 2009, Rules 19(a)(5), 20(e), 21(c)(2),
37(a),
37(b)(2), and 40(b)(3) are hereby amended as provided in the attachment
to this
Order.
RULE
19. TIME LIMITS
(a) Petition for
grant of
review/supplement/answer/reply.
(1)-(4) Unchanged.
(5) Delete
existing paragraphs (A) and (B) and
replace with the following:
(A) In all cases
where the petition is filed by counsel, a
supplement to the petition establishing good cause in accordance with
Rule 21
shall be filed contemporaneously with the petition.
A motion for leave to file the supplement
separately from the petition will be considered under Rule 30. If granted, the supplement shall be filed
within 20 days of the order. Any further
motion for enlargement of time to file the supplement, while
disfavored, will
be granted for good cause shown. An
appellee’s answer to the supplement to the petition, except for cases
on appeal
by the United States under Article 62, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 862 (2000),
may be
filed no later than 20 days after the filing of the supplement. See Rule 21(e). A
reply may be filed by the appellant no
later than 5 days after the filing of appellee’s answer.
An appellee’s answer to the supplement in a
case under appeal by the United States under Article 62, UCMJ, may be
filed no
later than 10 days after the filing of the supplement; an appellant may
file a
reply no later than 5 days after the filing of appellee’s answer.
(B) In all cases
where the petition is filed by the appellant, a
supplement to the petition shall be filed by counsel no later than 20
days
after the issuance by the Clerk of a notice of docketing of the
petition. See Rule 10(c). An appellee’s answer to the supplement to the
petition and an appellant’s reply may be filed in accordance with the
time
limits contained in Rule 19(a)(5)(A).
RULE
20. FORM OF PETITION FOR GRANT OF REVIEW
(a)-(d) Unchanged.
(e) Upon
issuance by the Clerk under Rule 10(c) of a notice of docketing of a
petition
for grant of review filed personally by
an appellant, counsel for the appellant shall file a supplement to
the
petition in accordance with the applicable time limit set forth in Rule
19(a)(5)(A) or (B), and the
provisions of Rule 21.
RULE
21. SUPPLEMENT TO PETITION FOR GRANT OF
REVIEW
(a)-(c)(1)
Unchanged.
(c)(2) Answer/reply
in other appeals. An appellee’s answer
to the supplement to the
petition for grant of review in all other appeal cases may be filed no
later
than 30 20 days after the
filing of the supplement; see Rule 21(e); (remainder of
paragraph is
unchanged).
RULE
37. PRINTING, COPYING AND STYLE
REQUIREMENTS
(a) Printing. Except for records of trial
and as
otherwise provided by Rules 24(f) and 27(a)(4) or any
order of the Court regarding the electronic filing of pleadings,
all pleadings and other papers relative to a case shall be typewritten
and
double-spaced, printed on one side only on white unglazed paper, 8.5 by
11
inches in size, securely fastened in the top left corner.
(Remainder of paragraph is unchanged.)
(b) Copying.
(1) Unchanged.
(2) Except
for electronically filed pleadings, Aan original and 7
legible
copies of all pleadings or other papers or other papers relative to a
case
shall be filed.
RULE
40. HEARINGS
(a)-(b)(2)
Unchanged.
(3) Time
Allowed. Each side will normally be
allotted 30
20
minutes to present oral argument.
ORDER
IN
RE ELECTRONIC FILING
(a) petitions for
grant of
review filed by counsel under Rule 18(a)(1);
(b) supplements
to
petitions for grant of review filed under Rule 21;
(c) answers
(including
10-day letters to the Clerk) and replies filed under Rule 21(c); and
(d) motions filed
under
Rule 30 that concern the pleadings described in paragraphs (a)-(c), and
replies
thereto, when such motions are filed prior to the Court’s action
granting or
denying a petition for grant of review.
It is further
ordered that
the Orders pertaining to electronic filing issued on May 8, 2003 (58
M.J. 282)
and August 5, 2004 (60 M.J. 308) are hereby rescinded, effective
September 1,
2009.
Guidelines
for Electronic Filing of Pleadings
1.
Scope.
The United States
Court of
Appeals for the Armed Forces adopts the following provisions to govern
the
filing of the documents described in paragraphs (a)-(d) of the order
(hereinafter collectively referred to as “petition documents”):
a. This Order
applies to
all petition documents filed electronically on or after September 1,
2009. An appendix to the supplement to the
petition
for grant of review (containing the decision of the Court of Criminal
Appeals,
matters submitted pursuant to United States v. Grostefon, 12
M.J. 431
(C.M.A. 1982), and other required matter) is included in this
requirement to be
filed electronically unless it consists of more than 50 pages. In such a case, the appendix may be submitted
on paper and the supplement submitted electronically.
In lieu of submitting an appendix in excess
of 50 pages on paper, counsel may submit it in a CD or DVD format and
note in
the supplement that it is being filed in that format under separate
cover. Record matters in the form of video
media on
CD-ROM or DVD may be submitted in a separate volume of the appendix
that is
filed in accordance with Rule 21(b).
b. A petition for
grant of
review filed personally by an appellant shall be filed on paper as
provided
under Rule 20(a). All subsequent
petition documents filed by counsel in such a case may be filed on
paper or
electronically except as provided in section 1.c of these guidelines.
c. This Order does
not provide for electronic
filing
of documents
concerning other matters, such as
documents concerning certified cases; mandatory review cases;
writ-appeal
petitions; petitions for extraordinary relief; petitions for new trial;
and
petitions for reconsideration. In a case
arising under Article 67(a)(3), UCMJ (petitions for grant of review),
the Order
permits electronic filing only with respect to documents filed before
the Court
issues an order granting or denying review.
2.
Electronic
Filing Address.
Counsel shall
file
petition and motion documents at the following e-mail address: efiling@armfor.uscourts.gov. For questions or help concerning the
electronic filing of pleadings, counsel should contact the Clerk’s
Office at
(202) 761-1448.
3.
Procedure.
a. The electronic
filing
of a petition document shall be deemed filed as of the date and time of
the
transmission of the electronic mail message.
b. The electronic
mail
message shall contain the following in the subject block: (1) the name
of the
case; (2) the docket number if a docket number has been assigned; and
(3) the
words “electronic filing.” A description
of what is being attached will be included in the body of the
electronic mail
message.
c. The pleading
shall be
attached to the electronic mail message in Portable Document Format
(PDF), and,
when printed, shall be in compliance with the Rules of Practice and
Procedure
of the Court.
d. Counsel shall
send an
electronic copy of the message and all attachments to opposing counsel
to
accomplish service of the pleading under Rule 39. This
may be accomplished by listing opposing
counsel as a “cc” recipient of the electronic message.
e. The pleading
attached
to an electronic filing shall contain the conformed signature (“/s/”)
or
digital signature of the attorney of record.
This will comply with Rule 38.
f. If a pleading
is filed
electronically in accordance with this Order, the party is not required
to prepare
and file printed copies under Rules 37(a) and 37(b)(2).
The Court will send a reply electronic
message to the sender indicating receipt of the electronic filing.
g. Classified
material and
material under seal will not be filed electronically.
If such matters need to be filed, they will
be submitted to the Court on paper as a supplemental filing to the
document in
which they would otherwise appear. In
such cases, counsel will include in the text of the electronic mail
message a
notation that classified or sealed material is being separately
submitted. The classified or sealed
material will be
appropriately packaged, marked and delivered, and will include a
notation that
it accompanies an electronic filing in the case. All
classified material will be handled in
accordance with Rule 12.
h. Counsel must
refrain
from including and shall redact the following personal data identifiers
from
documents filed with the Court:
●
Social security numbers
●
Names of minors
●
Dates of birth
●
Financial account numbers
●
Home addresses.
i.
Upon entry of an order granting or denying an electronically
filed petition for grant of
review, the Clerk will electronically transmit a copy of the order to
counsel.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED
No. 09-0537/AR.
No.
09-0561/AF.
No.
09-0566/AF.
No.
09-0627/AR.
No.
09-0656/AF.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW - OTHER SUMMARY
DISPOSITIONS
No. 08-0621/AF.
EFFRON,
Chief
Judge (concurring in the result):
I concur in
the
result and
note that Appellant’s case remains subject to review in our Court under
Article
67(a)(2), Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 867(a)(2). See United States v. Angell,
No. 09-0098/AR, ___ M.J. ___ (C.A.A.F. 2009) (Effron, C.J., concurring
in
the
result).
BAKER, J.
(concurring in the result):
I concur in
the
result. See United States v.
Angell,
___ M.J. ___ (C.A.A.F. 2009) (Baker, J., concurring) and United
States v.
Rodriguez, 67 M.J. 110, 120 (C.A.A.F. 2009) (Baker, J., dissenting).
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No.
09-0726/AF.
No.
09-0727/AF.
No.
09-0728/AF.
No.
09-0729/MC.
No.
09-0730/AR.
MISCELLANEOUS DOCKET - FILINGS
UNITED
STATES
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
09-212
Tuesday,
July 14, 2009
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No.
09-0724/AR.
No.
09-0725/AR.
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No.
07-0870/AF.
No.
08-0804/AR.
No.
09-0665/AR.
No.
09-8025/AR. Hasan K. AKBAR, Petitioner
v.
UNITED
STATES
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
09-211
Monday,
July
13, 2009
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF
REVIEW DENIED
No. 09-0491/AF.
No.
09-0553/AR.
No. 09-0571/AR.
No. 09-0620/AR.
No.
09-0640/AF.
No.
09-0647/AF.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No.
09-0722/AF.
No.
09-0723/NA.
UNITED
STATES
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
09-210
Friday,
July
10, 2009
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF
REVIEW FILED
No.
09-0720/MC.
No.
09-0721/AR.
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No.
09-0223/AR.
MANDATES ISSUED
No.
08-0779/AR.
UNITED
STATES
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
09-209
Thursday,
July 9, 2009
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF
REVIEW DENIED
No.
09-0420/AR.
No.
09-0474/AR.
No.
09-0545/NA.
No.
09-0579/AR.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
UNITED
STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
09-208
Wednesday,
July 8, 2009
MISCELLANEOUS DOCKET -
FILINGS
Misc.
No. 09-8028/NA. Frank J. OSHESKIE,
Petitioner v.
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No.
09-0371/AR.
No.
09-0420/AR.
No.
09-0616/AR.
No.
09-0660/AF.
MANDATES ISSUED
No.
08-0580/AR.
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
09-207
Tuesday,
July 7, 2009
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF
REVIEW DENIED
No.
09-0235/AR.
No.
09-0343/AR.
No.
09-0390/CG.
No.
09-0415/AR.
No.
09-0503/AR.
No.
09-0556/AR.
No.
09-0574/AR.
No.
09-0605/AR.
No.
09-0611/AR.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No.
09-0718/AR.
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No.
09-0242/MC.
No.
09-0498/AR.
UNITED
STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
09-206
Monday,
July 6, 2009
ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW
No.
09-0258/NA.
WHETHER, AT THE
TIME OF
APPELLANT'S COURT-MARTIAL, ARTICLE 134 (INDECENT ASSAULT), UNIFORM CODE
OF MILITARY
JUSTICE (UCMJ), WAS AN OFFENSE NECESSARILY INCLUDED IN ARTICLE 120
(RAPE), UCMJ,
IN LIGHT OF ARTICLE 79, UCMJ, UNITED STATES v. MILLER, 67 M.J
385
(C.A.A.F. 2009), AND MANUAL FOR COURTS-MARTIAL, UNITED STATES,
PT. IV,
PARAS. 45.b(1) AND 63 (2005 ED.).
Briefs will be
filed under
Rule 25.
No.
09-5002/NA.
WHETHER APPELLEE
WAIVED THE
ISSUE OF THE DISQUALIFICATION OF THE TRIAL COUNSEL BY HIS UNCONDITIONAL
GUILTY
PLEAS.
Briefs will be
filed under
Rule 25.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No. 09-0714/AR.
No. 09-0715/NA.
No. 09-0716/AF.
No. 09-0717/AF.
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No. 08-0719/CG.
No. 09-0145/AR.
No. 09-0415/AR.
No. 09-0581/AF.
No. 09-0603/NA.
No. 09-0617/AR.
No. 09-5004/NA.
that
the motion for expedited review on behalf of the United States Air
Force is
hereby denied, and that
the above-entitled action be called for hearing at 9:30
a.m. on the 21st day of September, 2009. Each
side will be allotted 20 minutes to
present oral argument. The hearing will
be held in the Courtroom of the United States Court of
Appeals for the Armed Forces, 450 E Street, Northwest,
UNITED
STATES
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
09-205
Thursday,
July 2, 2009
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No.
09-0073/AR.
No.
09-0608/AR.
DAILY
JOURNAL
No.
09-204
Wednesday,
July 1, 2009
APPEALS - SUMMARY
DISPOSITIONS
No.
08-0789/AR.
No.
09-0308/AR.
ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW
No.
08-0789/AR.
No.
09-0271/AF.
WHETHER
APPELLANT'S
CONVICTION FOR INDECENT ACTS WITH ANOTHER MUST BE SET ASIDE BECAUSE THE
MILITARY JUDGE ISSUED ERRONEOUS AND MISLEADING INSTRUCTIONS SUPPORTING
INDECENT
ACTS AS AN AVAILABLE LESSER-INCLUDED OFFENSE TO THE ORIGINAL RAPE
CHARGE AND
THE RESULTING CONVICTION UNDER CHARGE I AND ITS SPECIFICATION AMOUNTED
TO A
FATAL VARIANCE.
Briefs will be
filed under
Rule 25.
No.
09-0308/AR.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED
No. 09-0236/AR.
No. 09-0317/AF.
No. 09-0434/AR.
No. 09-0505/MC.
No. 09-0521/NA.
No. 09-0543/AR.
No. 09-0555/AR.
No. 09-0654/AF.
PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED
No. 09-0708/AF.
No. 09-0709/AF.
No. 09-0710/AR.
No. 09-0711/AR.
No. 09-0712/AR.
No. 09-0713/AR.
PETITIONS FOR RECONSIDERATION DENIED
No. 08-0720/AF.
Mohamed M. MOHAMED. CCA 36421. On
consideration of Appellant’s petition
for reconsideration of this Court’s order denying Appellant’s motion to
attach
documents, __ M.J. __ (Daily Journal June 10, 2009), said
petition for reconsideration is hereby denied.
INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS
No.
07-0253/NA.
No. 08-0344/AR.
No. 08-0621/AF.
No. 09-0342/AF.
No. 09-0396/AF.
No. 09-0589/AR.
No. 09-8025/AR.
Hasan K. AKBAR, Petitioner, v.
No.
09-8026/AR. Hasan K. AKBAR, Petitioner,
v. The Army Court of Criminal Appeals, Colonel Paul P. Holden, Colonel
John B.
Hoffman, and Colonel Annamary Sullivan, and