UNITED
STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
Monday,
October 31, 2016
Petitions for Grant of Review Filed
No. 17-0049/MC. U.S. v. Tanner J. Forrester. CCA 201500295.
No. 17-0050/AR. U.S. v. Donnell M. Spriggs. CCA 20150077.
No. 17-0051/AR. U.S. v. Joselito
Arroyo, Jr. CCA 20150362.
No. 17-0052/AF. U.S. v. Benjamin J. Moore.
CCA 38773.
UNITED
STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
Friday,
October 28, 2016
Petitions for Grant of Review Filed
No. 17-0046/AF. U.S. v. James M. Sauter,
Jr. CCA 38772.
No. 17-0047/AR. U.S. v. Adrian T. Douglas. CCA
20140449.
No. 17-0048/AR. U.S. v. David J. Dorris. CCA
20140185.
Orders Granting Petition for Review
No. 16-0712/AR. U.S.
v. James G. Donohue. CCA
20140124. 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 UNITED STATES COURT OF MILITARY
COMMISSION REVIEW JUDGES JAMES WILSON HERRING, JR. AND PAULETTE VANCE BURTON
ARE STATUTORILY AUTHORIZED TO SIT AS TWO OF THE ARMY COURT OR CRIMINAL APPEALS
JUDGES ON THE PANEL THAT DECIDED APPELLANT'S CASE.
II.
WHETHER THE SERVICE OF JUDGES JAMES
WILSON HERRING, JR., AND JUDGE PAULETTE VANCE BURTON ON BOTH THE ARMY COURT OF
CRIMINAL APPEALS AND THE UNITED STATES COURT OF MILITARY COMMISSION REVIEW
VIOLATED THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE GIVEN THEIR STATUS AS SUPERIOR OFFICERS ON THE
UNITED STATES COURT OF MILITARY COMMISSION REVIEW.
No
briefs will be filed under Rule 25.
No. 16-0757/AR. U.S.
v. Trevor L. Sands. CCA
20130946. 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 BURTON AND HERRING.
II.
WHETHER, AS APPOINTED JUDGES OF THE CMCR, JUDGES BURTON AND HERRING DO 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 VIOLATES THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE.
No
briefs will be filed under Rule 25.
Interlocutory Orders
No. 16-0651/AF. U.S. v. Nicole A.
Dalmazzi. CCA 38808. On further consideration
of the granted issues, it appears that the record of trial and joint appendix
contain information documenting the President's nomination of Colonel Martin
Mitchell to the United States Court of Military Commission Review (CMCR), as
well as the Senate's confirmation of Colonel Mitchell to that position.
However, it does not appear that there is adequate evidence in the record
demonstrating that Colonel Mitchell was subsequently appointed to the CMCR.
Accordingly, it is ordered that on or before the 8th day of November, 2016,
counsel for the parties shall file documentation with the Court relating to
Colonel Mitchell's 2016 appointment and commission to the CMCR, and
establishing the date when he took the oath of office to execute that
appointment.
UNITED
STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
Thursday,
October 27, 2016
Petitions for Grant of Review Filed
No. 17-0045/AF. U.S. v. Dane A. Naro.
CCA
S32305.
Petitions for Grant of Review Denied
No. 16-0662/MC. U.S. v. Emilio R. Moran. CCA
201500380.
No. 16-0740/AR. U.S. v. Samuel A. Wright. CCA
20130296.
No. 16-0750/NA. U.S. v. Patricia D.
Martinez. CCA 201600069.
No. 16-0755/AF. U.S. v. Juan M.M. Silva.
CCA
S32316.
Orders Granting Petition for Review
No. 16-0671/AF. U.S. v. Keanu D.W. Ortiz. CCA 38839. 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 UNITED STATES COURT OF MILITARY
COMMISSION REVIEW JUDGE, MARTIN T. MITCHELL, IS STATUTORILY AUTHORIZED TO SIT
AS ONE OF THE AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS JUDGES ON THE PANEL THAT
DECIDED APPELLANT'S CASE.
II.
WHETHER JUDGE MARTIN T. MITCHELL'S
SERVICE ON BOTH THE AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS AND THE UNITED STATES
COURT OF MILITARY COMMISSION REVIEW VIOLATES THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE GIVEN HIS
STATUS AS A SUPERIOR OFFICER ON THE UNITED STATES COURT OF MILITARY COMMISSION
REVIEW.
No
briefs will be filed under Rule 25.
No. 16-0739/AR. U.S.
v. Collins Nyangau. CCA
20150495. 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 DOES 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 VIOLATES THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE.
No
briefs will be filed under Rule 25.
No. 16-0751/AR. U.S.
v. D'Andre R. Fletcher. CCA
20140949. 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 APPOINTMENTS AS
COURT OF MILITARY COMMISSION JUDGES TERMINATED THE MILITARY COMMISSIONS OF
JUDGES CELTNIEKS AND BURTON.
II. WHETHER, AS
APPOINTED JUDGES OF THE COURT OF MILITARY COMMISSION REVIEW, JUDGES BURTON AND
CELTNIEKS DO 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 VIOLATES THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE.
No
briefs will be filed under Rule 25.
No. 16-0761/AR. U.S.
v. Jacob I. McGowan. CCA
20150807. 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 DOES 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 VIOLATES THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE.
No
briefs will be filed under Rule 25.
No. 17-0002/AR. U.S.
v. Alvin J. Fogle. CCA
20140534. 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 DOES 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 VIOLATES THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE.
No
briefs will be filed under Rule 25.
Interlocutory Orders
No. 16-0689/AF. U.S. v. Charles D. Buford.
CCA 2016-04. Appellant's motion to extend time to file
a brief granted to November 7, 2016.
No. 17-0041/AR. U.S. v. Justin M. Gurcynski. CCA
20140518. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to
the petition for grant of review granted to November 15, 2016.
Petitions for Reconsideration Denied
No. 16-0277/AR. U.S. v. William P. Moynihan. CCA
20130855. On consideration of Appellee's petition for reconsideration of
this Court's decision to vacate and remand in light of United States v.
Hills, 75 M.J. 350 (C.A.A.F. 2016), it is ordered that said petition for
reconsideration be, and the same is, hereby denied.
No. 16-0369/AR. U.S. v. Arturo A. Tafoya. CCA
20140798. On consideration of Appellee's petition for reconsideration of
this Court's decision to vacate and remand in light of United States v.
Hills, 75 M.J. 350 (C.A.A.F. 2016), it is ordered that said petition for
reconsideration be, and the same is, hereby denied.
No. 16-0416/AR. U.S. v. Gene N. Williams. CCA
20130582. On consideration of Appellee's petition for reconsideration of
this Court's decision to vacate and remand in light of United States v.
Hills, 75 M.J. 350 (C.A.A.F. 2016), it is ordered that said petition for
reconsideration be, and the same is, hereby denied.
UNITED
STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
Wednesday,
October 26, 2016
Petitions for Grant of Review Filed
No. 17-0041/AR. U.S. v. Justin M. Gurcynski. CCA 20140518.
No. 17-0042/AR. U.S. v. Ali A. Alirad,
Jr. CCA 20150404.
No. 17-0043/AR. U.S. v. Eugene J. Clement. CCA 20140502.
No. 17-0044/AR. U.S. v. Andy Delvalle. CCA 20160157.
Miscellaneous Docket - Summary
Dispositions
No. 17-0009/AF. Sebastian P. LaBella,
Petitioner v. United States, and United States Air Force Court of Criminal
Appeals, Respondents. On consideration of the petition for extraordinary relief
in the nature of a writ of error coram vobis or, in the alternative, writ-appeal petition for
review of the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal
Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is hereby denied.
Interlocutory Orders
No. 16-0712/AR. U.S. v. James G. Donohue. CCA 20140124. Appellee's motion to file a 10-day answer letter out of
time is denied.
No. 17-0037/AF. U.S. v. Cory D. Phillips.
CCA
S38771. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the
petition for grant of review granted to November 14, 2016.
Hearings
No. 16-0336/CG. U.S.
v. Omar M. Gomez. CCA 1394.
No. 16-0267/AR. U.S. v. Nathan C. Wilson. CCA 20140135.
UNITED
STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
Tuesday,
October 25, 2016
Hearings
No. 16-0500/AF. U.S. v. Justin L. Fetrow. CCA 38631.
No. 16-0296/AF. U.S. v. Joseph R. Dockery
III. CCA 38624.
UNITED
STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
Monday,
October 24, 2016
Petitions for Grant of Review Filed
No. 17-0036/AF. U.S. v. Joseph L. Camacho,
Jr. CCA S32324.
No. 17-0037/AF. U.S. v. Cory D. Phillips.
CCA
S38771.
No. 17-0038/AR. U.S. v. Christopher B. Smith. CCA 20140353.
No. 17-0040/AR. U.S. v. Keith D. Land. CCA 20160220.
Petitions for Grant of Review Denied
No. 16-0747/MC. U.S. v. Brandon J. Johnson-Jordan. CCA 201500174.
Miscellaneous Docket - Filings
No. 17-0039/NA. In Re Joshua G. Anderson. Notice is hereby
given that correspondence from Mr. Joshua G. Anderson, which this Court
construes as a petition for extraordinary relief in the nature of a writ of
habeas corpus, was filed under Rule 27(a) on October 18, 2016, and placed on
the docket this 24th day of October, 2016. On consideration thereof, it is
ordered that said petition is hereby dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
Interlocutory Orders
No. 17-0028/CG. U.S. v. Shane E. Reese.
CCA 1422.
Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for
grant of review granted to November 8, 2016.
No. 17-0031/AR. U.S. v. Francisco I. Narewski. CCA 20140080. Appellant's
motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review
granted to November 9, 2016.
No. 17-0033/MC. U.S. v. Christopher M. Henegar. CCA 201500379. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the
supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to November 10, 2016.
UNITED
STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
Friday,
October 21, 2016
Petitions for Grant of Review Filed
No. 17-0032/AR. U.S. v. Sean M. Ahern. CCA 20130822.
No. 17-0033/MC. U.S. v. Christopher M. Henegar. CCA 201500379.
No. 17-0035/AR. U.S. v. Jeffry A. Feliciano, Jr. CCA 20140766.
Interlocutory Orders
No. 16-0530/AF. U.S. v. Patrick A. Shea.
CCA
S32225. Appellant's motion to file a supplemental joint appendix is granted.
No. 17-0034/NA. U.S. v. Richard A. Latour. CCA 201600114. Notice is hereby given that a motion for an
enlargement of time to file a certificate for review of the decision of the
United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals, and motion to stay
the trial proceedings were filed under Rule 30 on this 21st day of October,
2016. On consideration thereof, it is ordered that said motions are hereby
denied.
UNITED
STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
Thursday,
October 20, 2016
Petitions for Grant of Review Filed
No. 17-0030/AF. U.S. v. Kyle A. Drake.
CCA
S32358.
No. 17-0031/AR. U.S. v. Francisco I. Narewski. CCA 20140080.
Petitions for Grant of Review Denied
No. 16-0698/AR. U.S. v. Derek T. Overmyer. CCA 20150062.
No. 16-0724/AF. U.S. v. Donald R.B. Simmons. CCA 38788.
No. 16-0743/AR. U.S. v. Lionel P. Scott. CCA 20150595.
Petitions for Grant of Review -
Summary Dispositions
No. 16-0501/AF. U.S. v. Richard A. Rivera. CCA 38649. 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 dismissed for lack
of jurisdiction.
Orders Granting Petition for Review
No. 16-0490/MC. U.S.
v. Jonathan A. Lopez. CCA 201400289. 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 specified by the Court:
WHETHER
THE MILITARY JUDGE ERRED BY INSTRUCTING 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," 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. 16-0599/AR. U.S.
v. Jared D. Herrmann. CCA 20131064. 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 EVIDENCE IS LEGALLY SUFFICIENT TO FIND APPELLANT COMMITTED RECKLESS
ENDANGERMENT, WHICH REQUIRES PROOF THE CONDUCT WAS
LIKELY TO PRODUCE DEATH OR GRIEVOUS BODILY HARM.
Briefs
will be filed under Rule 25.
No. 16-0658/AR. U.S.
v. Tyler F. Ho. CCA 20140068. 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 APPELLANT WAS PUNISHED FOR 28
DAYS BY BEING FORCED TO QUARTER A JUNIOR OFFICER IN HIS HOME AND NOT AWARDED
CREDIT.
II. WHETHER ACCEPTANCE
OF APPOINTMENTS AS CMCR JUDGES TERMINATED THE
MILITARY COMMISSIONS OF JUDGES CELTNIEKS, BURTON AND
HERRING.
III.
WHETHER, AS APPOINTED JUDGES OF THE CMCR, JUDGES BURTON
AND HERRING DO NOT MEET THE UCMJ DEFINITION OF
APPELLATE MILITARY JUDGES.
IV.
WHETHER THE ASSIGNMENT OF INFERIOR OFFICERS AND PRINCIPAL OFFICERS TO A SINGLE
JUDICIAL TRIBUNAL ITSELF VIOLATES THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE.
Briefs
will be filed under Rule 25 on Issue I only.
No. 16-0670/AR. U.S.
v. Matthew N. Watkins. CCA 20140275. 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 specified by the
Court:
I.
WHETHER ACCEPTANCE OF APPOINTMENT AS A CMCR JUDGE TERMINATED THE MILITARY COMMISSION OF JUDGE CELTNIEKS.
II. WHETHER, AS AN
APPOINTED JUDGE OF THE CMCR, JUDGE CELTNIEKS DOES 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 VIOLATES THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE.
No
briefs will be filed under Rule 25.
No. 16-0680/AR. U.S.
v. Shquon T. Hodge. CCA 20160056. 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 specified by the Court:
I.
WHETHER ACCEPTANCE OF APPOINTMENT AS A CMCR JUDGE TERMINATED THE MILITARY COMMISSION OF JUDGE CELTNIEKS.
II. WHETHER, AS AN
APPOINTED JUDGE OF THE CMCR, JUDGE CELTNIEKS DOES 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 VIOLATES THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE.
No
briefs will be filed under Rule 25.
No. 16-0725/AR. U.S.
v. Jacob D. Blakesley. CCA 20150012. 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 specified by the Court:
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 DOES
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 VIOLATES THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE.
No
briefs will be filed under Rule 25.
No. 16-0756/AF. U.S. v. Timothy J. Morgan. CCA 38825. 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 specified by the Court:
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 ANY OFFENSE CHARGED, YOU MUST FIND THE ACCUSED 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.
Petitions for Reconsideration Granted
No. 16-0650/AR. U.S.
v. Courtney A. Craig. CCA 20150272. On consideration of Appellant's petition for
reconsideration of this Court's Order issued 12 August 2016, it is ordered that
said petition for reconsideration is hereby granted, that the Order of 12
August 2016, denying the petition for grant of review is hereby vacated, and that
the petition for grant of review is hereby granted on the following issues:
I.
WHETHER ACCEPTANCE OF APPOINTMENTS AS CMCR JUDGES TERMINATED THE MILITARY COMMISSIONS OF JUDGE
HERRING AND JUDGE BURTON.
II. WHETHER, AS
APPOINTED JUDGES OF THE CMCR, JUDGE HERRING AND JUDGE
BURTON DO 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 VIOLATES THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE.
No
briefs will be filed under Rule 25.
UNITED
STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
Wednesday,
October 19, 2016
Petitions for Grant of Review Filed
No. 17-0028/CG. U.S. v. Shane E. Reese.
CCA 1422.
Miscellaneous Docket - Filings
No. 17-0029/AF. Clarence Anderson III v. United
States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals. Notice is hereby given that
a petition for extraordinary relief in the nature of a writ of mandamus was
filed under Rule 27(a) on this date.
Orders Granting Petition for Review
No. 16-0663/MC. U.S.
v. Travis V. Nauta. CCA 201500244. 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," 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 INSTRUCTION RELATING TO WHEN MEMBERS MUST OR SHOULD CONVICT AN
ACCUSED.
No
briefs will be filed under Rule 25.
No. 16-0705/AR. U.S.
v. Sean R. Erikson. CCA 20150130. 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 THE MILITARY JUDGE ERRED IN EXCLUDING EVIDENCE THAT THE VICTIM
PREVIOUSLY MADE A FALSE ACCUSATION OF SEXUAL CONTACT AGAINST ANOTHER SOLDIER.
II.
CMCR JUDGES LARSS G. CELTNIEKS AND PAULETTE V. BURTON ARE NOT STATUTORILY
AUTHORIZED TO SIT ON THE ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS.
III.
EVEN IF CMCR JUDGES LARSS
G. CELTNIEKS AND PAULETTE V. BURTON ARE STATUTORILY
AUTHORIZED TO BE ASSIGNED TO THE ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS, THEIR SERVICE ON
BOTH COURTS VIOLATES THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE GIVEN THEIR NEWLY ATTAINED STATUS
AS SUPERIOR OFFICERS.
Briefs
will be filed under Rule 25 on issue I only.
No. 16-0711/AF. U.S. v. Michael J.D. Briggs. CCA 38730. 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 AFCCA PANEL THAT HEARD APPELLANT'S CASE WAS
IMPROPERLY CONSTITUTED.
No
briefs will be filed under Rule 25.
Interlocutory Orders
No. 16-0229/AF. U.S. v. Ellwood T. Bowen.
CCA 38616.
On consideration of the motion filed by John G. Scott, Esq., to allow law
student Adam Zenger to present oral argument as amicus curiae on behalf of Appellee, it
is ordered that said motion is hereby granted, and that amicus curiae will be allotted 10 minutes to present oral argument.
No. 16-0229/AF. U.S. v. Ellwood T. Bowen.
CCA 38616.
On consideration of the motion filed by Michael N. Mulvania,
Esq., to allow law student Patrick D. Kummerer to
present oral argument as amicus curiae on
behalf of Appellant, it is ordered that said motion is hereby granted, and that
amicus curiae will be allotted 10
minutes to present oral argument.
No. 16-0484/AF. U.S. v. Christopher L.
Oliver. CCA 38481. Appellant's motion to extend time to file a brief is
granted to October 21, 2016.
UNITED
STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
Tuesday,
October 18, 2016
Petitions for Grant of Review Filed
No. 17-0026/AR. U.S. v. Joshua R. Luna. CCA 20150365.
No. 17-0027/AR. U.S. v. Nicholas E. White. CCA 20140945.
Petitions for Grant of Review Denied
No. 16-0734/AR. U.S. v. Christopher R. Gamblin. CCA 20140557.
No. 16-0742/MC. U.S. v. Nathan M. Villarreal. CCA 201500399.
Orders Granting Petition for Review
No. 16-0617/AF. U.S. v. Joseph D. Morchinek.
CCA S32291. 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 UNITED STATES COURT OF MILITARY
COMMISSION REVIEW JUDGE MARTIN T. MITCHELL IS STATUTORILY AUTHORIZED TO SIT AS
ONE OF THE AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS JUDGES ON THE PANEL THAT DECIDED
APPELLANT'S CASE.
II.
WHETHER JUDGE MARTIN T. MITCHELL'S
SERVICE ON BOTH THE AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS AND THE UNITED STATES
COURT OF MILITARY COMMISSION REVIEW VIOLATES THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE GIVEN HIS
STATUS AS A SUPERIOR OFFICER ON THE UNITED STATES COURT OF MILITARY COMMISSION
REVIEW.
No
briefs will be filed under Rule 25.
No. 16-0715/AR. U.S.
v. Zachary A. Bennett. CCA 20121072. 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 APPOINTMENTS AS CMCR JUDGES TERMINATED THE MILITARY COMMISSIONS OF JUDGES
BURTON AND HERRING.
II. WHETHER, AS
APPOINTED JUDGES OF THE CMCR, JUDGES BURTON AND
HERRING DO 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 VIOLATES THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE.
No
briefs will be filed under Rule 25.
No. 16-0723/AR. U.S.
v. Kyle D. Rich. CCA 20130805. 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 BURTON.
II. WHETHER, AS AN
APPOINTED JUDGE OF THE CMCR, JUDGE BURTON DOES 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 VIOLATES THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE.
No
briefs will be filed under Rule 25.
No. 16-0733/AR. U.S.
v. Christopher B. Melvin. CCA 20140761. 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
CMCR JUDGES LARSS G. CELTNIEKS AND PAULETTE V. BURTON ARE NOT STATUTORILY
AUTHORIZED TO SIT ON THE ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS.
II.
EVEN IF CMCR
JUDGES LARSS G. CELTNIEKS
AND PAULETTE V. BURTON ARE STATUTORILY AUTHORIZED TO BE ASSIGNED TO THE ARMY
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS, WHETHER THEIR SERVICE ON BOTH COURTS VIOLATES THE
APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE GIVEN THEIR NEWLY ATTAINED STATUS AS SUPERIOR OFFICERS.
No
briefs will be filed under Rule 25.
No. 16-0746/AR. U.S.
v. Ryan W. Rochford. CCA 20140565. 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 CELTNIEKS.
II. WHETHER, AS AN
APPOINTED JUDGE OF THE CMCR, JUDGE CELTNIEKS DOES 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 VIOLATES THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE.
No
briefs will be filed under Rule 25.
Interlocutory Orders
No. 16-0711/AF. U.S. v. Michael J.D.
Briggs. CCA 38730. On consideration of Appellee's
motion to dismiss the petition for grant of review, and Appellant's motion to
supplement the record, it is ordered that Appellant's motion to supplement the
record is hereby granted, and that Appellee's motion
to dismiss the petition for grant of review is hereby denied as moot.
No. 16-0747/MC. U.S. v. Brandon J. Johnson-Jordan. CCA 201500174. On
consideration of Appellee's motion to strike, it is
ordered that said motion is hereby denied.
Petitions for Reconsideration Granted
No. 16-0713/AR. U.S.
v. Samuel E. Nealy III. CCA 20140029. On consideration of
Appellant's petition for reconsideration of this Court's Order issued September
27, 2016, it is ordered that said petition for reconsideration is hereby
granted, that the Order of September 27, 2016, denying the petition for grant
of review is hereby vacated, and the petition for grant of review is hereby
granted on the following issues:
I.
WHETHER ACCEPTANCE OF APPOINTMENT AS CMCR JUDGES TERMINATED THE MILITARY COMMISSIONS OF JUDGE
HERRING AND JUDGE BURTON.
II.
WHETHER, AS APPOINTED JUDGES OF THE
CMCR, JUDGE HERRING AND JUDGE BURTON MEET THE UCMJ DEFINITION
OF APPELLATE MILITARY JUDGE.
III.
WHETHER THE ASSIGNMENT OF INFERIOR OFFICERS AND PRINCIPAL OFFICERS TO A SINGLE
JUDICIAL TRIBUNAL ITSELF VIOLATES THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE.
No
briefs will be filed under Rule 25.
UNITED
STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
Monday,
October 17, 2016
Petitions for Grant of Review Filed
No. 17-0025/MC. U.S. v. Lucas Eastman. CCA 201600071.
Interlocutory Orders
No. 16-0651/AF. U.S. v. Nicole A. Dalmazzi. CCA 38808. On consideration of the motions filed by the
Military Commissions Defense Organization for leave to file an
amicus curiae brief in support of neither party and to allow argument as amicus curiae, it is ordered that said
motions are hereby granted, and that amicus
curiae will be allotted 10 minutes to present oral argument.
No. 16-0746/AR. U.S. v. Ryan W. Rochford. CCA 20140565. Appellant's
motion to submit corrected index is granted.
No. 16-0748/NA. U.S. v. David W. Neiman.
CCA
201500119. Appellant's second motion to extend time to file the
supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to November 1, 2016.
No. 17-0018/AR. U.S. v. Alan R. Shurtleff. CCA 20140633. Appellant's
motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of
review granted to November 3, 2016.
UNITED
STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
Friday,
October 14, 2016
Petitions for Grant of Review Filed
No. 17-0016/AR. U.S. v. Christopher L. Cottner. CCA 20150733.
No. 17-0017/AR. U.S. v. Jasmine S. Hercules. CCA 20150197.
No. 17-0018/AR. U.S. v. Alan R. Shurtleff. CCA 20140633.
No. 17-0019/AR. U.S. v. Luavasa
F. Tauala, Jr. CCA
20140658.
No. 17-0020/NA. U.S. v. Danny Soto.
CCA
201500384.
No. 17-0021/AR. U.S. v. Alvin S. Banks. CCA 20130948.
No. 17-0022/AR. U.S. v. Joseph A. Warren. CCA 20150104.
No. 17-0023/AR. U.S. v. Sammy G. Gulley. CCA 20160196.
No. 17-0024/AR. U.S. v. Joshua A. Tankersley. CCA 20140074.
UNITED
STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
Thursday,
October 13, 2016
Petitions for Grant of Review Filed
No. 17-0014/AR. U.S. v. Stephen C. Warren. CCA 20140510.
No. 17-0015/AF. U.S. v. Dustin B. Wood.
CCA 38792.
Petitions for Grant of Review Denied
No. 16-0707/AR. U.S. v. Miguel A. Molina. CCA 20130567.
No. 16-0736/AR. U.S. v. Kristopher S. Wood. CCA 20150601.
No. 16-0737/AR. U.S. v. Daniel E. Moyano-Fermin. CCA 20140910.
Orders Granting Petition for Review
No. 16-0722/AR. U.S.
v. Max S. Maydoney. CCA 20150324. 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, CMCR
JUDGE, IS STATUTORILY AUTHORIZED TO SIT ON THE ARMY CCA,
AND EVEN IF SHE IS STATUTORILY AUTHORIZED TO BE ASSIGNED TO THE ARMY CCA, WHETHER HER SERVICE ON BOTH COURTS VIOLATES THE
APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE GIVEN HER 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
Wednesday,
October 12, 2016
Petitions for Grant of Review Filed
No. 17-0013/AF. U.S.
v. Alex R. Goss. CCA 38805.
Petitions for Grant
of Review Dismissed
No. 16-0620/AF. U.S.
v. Victorino Refre, Jr. CCA 2016-08.
On consideration of Appellee's motion to
dismiss the petition for grant of review for lack of jurisdiction, Appellant's
motion to extend time to file a supplement to the petition for grant of review
and Appellant's second motion to extend time to file an answer to Appellee's motion to dismiss, it is ordered that the Appellee's motion to dismiss the petition for grant of
review for lack of jurisdiction is hereby granted and Appellant's motions to
extend time are hereby denied as moot.
Orders Granting
Petition for Review
No. 16-0588/NA. U.S. v. Adam S. Nelms.
CCA
201400369. Appellant's petition for grant of review
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 A CHARGED
OFFENSE, 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.
No
briefs will be filed under Rule 25.
Miscellaneous Docket
– Petitions Dismissed
No. 16-0672/AF. Victorino Refre,
Jr. v. U.S. Respondent's motion
to dismiss the petition for extraordinary relief in the nature of error coram nobis is hereby granted for
lack of jurisdiction.
Interlocutory Orders
No. 16-0658/AR. U.S. v. Tyler F. Ho. CCA 20140068. Appellant's motion to consider additional
assignments of error granted. Appellee may file an
answer to the additional assignments of error on or before November 1, 2016.
No. 16-0727/AF. U.S.
v. James W. Richards, IV. CCA 38346. Appellant's
third motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of
review granted up to and including October 14, 2016.
No. 17-0010/MC. U.S. v. Alfredo Solis. CCA 201500249. Appellant's
motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of
review granted to October 31, 2016.
Hearings
No. 16-0360/AR. U.S. v. Todd D. Sewell. CCA 20130460.
No. 16-0214/NA. U.S.
v. Michael Z. Pabelona. CCA 201400224.
UNITED
STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
Tuesday,
October 11, 2016
Petitions for Grant of Review Filed
No. 17-0010/MC. U.S. v. Alfredo Solis. CCA 201500249.
No. 17-0011/AR. U.S. v. Benjamin J. Durham. CCA 20150377.
No. 17-0012/AR. U.S. v. Thomas M. Hanna. CCA 20140934.
Petitions for
Reconsideration Granted
No. 16-0677/AR. U.S.
v. Jovanni Pimentel. CCA 20150361.
Appellant's petition for reconsideration of this Court's Order issued September
15, 2016, is hereby granted. The Order
denying the petition for grant of review issued September 15, 2016, is hereby
vacated, and the petition for grant of review is hereby granted on the
following issues:
I. WHETHER
ACCEPTANCE OF APPOINTMENT AS A CMCR JUDGE TERMINATED
THE MILITARY COMMISSIONS OF JUDGE HERRING AND JUDGE BURTON.
II. WHETHER,
AS APPOINTED JUDGES OF THE CMCR, JUDGE HERRING AND
JUDGE BURTON DO 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 VIOLATES THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE.
No
briefs will be filed under Rule 25.
Hearings
No. 16-0301/AR. U.S. v. Luis G. Nieto. CCA 20150386.
No. 16-0678/CG. Thomas J. Randolph
v. HV and the U.S. CCA 001-16.
UNITED
STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
Friday,
October 7, 2016
Petitions for Grant of Review Filed
No. 17-0008/AR. U.S. v. Matthew R. Strempler. CCA 20150527.
Miscellaneous Docket
- Filings
No. 17-0009/AF. Sebastian
P. LaBella v. U.S. and U.S. Air Force Court of
Criminal Appeals. Notice is hereby given that a petition for
extraordinary relief in the nature of a writ of error coram
vobis or, in the alternative, writ-appeal petition
for review of the decision of the United
States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals on application for extraordinary
relief in the nature of a writ of error coram nobis was filed this date.
Interlocutory Orders
No. 16-0744/AR. U.S. v. Edward P. Touchette. CCA 20150439. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the
supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to October 26, 2016.
No. 16-0749/AR. U.S. v. Richard S. Carroll. CCA 20150049. Appellee's motion to extend time to file an answer to the
supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to November 7, 2016.
No. 17-0003/AR. U.S. v. Christopher B. Hukill. CCA 20140939. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the
supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to October 24, 2016.
No. 17-0005/AR. U.S. v. Donavon A. Scott. CCA 20150127. Appellant's
motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of
review granted to October 25, 2016.
UNITED
STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
Thursday,
October 6, 2016
Petitions for Grant of Review Filed
No. 17-0007/AF. U.S. v. Joe A. Garcia.
CCA 38814.
Petitions for Grant of Review -
Summary Dispositions
No. 16-0730/AR. U.S.
v. David L. Benitez III. CCA 20150509. On consideration of
the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Army
Court of Criminal Appeals, it is noted Appellant's pleas of guilty with respect
to Specifications 1, 5, and 9 of Charge II are provident only with respect to
one location, vice the two locations charged. Accordingly, in light of this
error, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted, and that the
decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed,
except for the words "and at or near Bolivia, North Carolina" in
Specifications 1 and 9 of Charge II, and "at or near Oak Island, North
Carolina and" in Specification 5 of Charge II. The finding of guilty as to
those excepted words is set aside and the words are dismissed.
Orders Granting Petition for Review
No. 16-0732/AR. U.S.
v. Kameron M. Coleman. CCA 20140709. 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 DOES 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 VIOLATES THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE.
No
briefs will be filed under Rule 25.
UNITED
STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
Wednesday,
October 5, 2016
Petitions for Grant of Review Filed
No. 17-0005/AR. U.S. v. Donavon A. Scott. CCA 20150127.
Petitions for New Trial Filed
No. 17-0006/AR. U.S. v. Travis L. Gallegos. CCA 20130926.
UNITED
STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
Tuesday,
October 4, 2016
Petitions for Grant of Review Filed
No. 17-0001/AF. U.S. v. Rudy R. Ruiz.
CCA 38752.
No. 17-0002/AR. U.S. v. Alvin J. Fogle. CCA 20140534.
No. 17-0003/AR. U.S. v. Christopher B. Hukill. CCA 20140939.
No. 17-0004/AR. U.S. v. Jason A. Maestre. CCA 20140549.
UNITED
STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
DAILY
JOURNAL
Monday,
October 3, 2016
Petitions for Grant of Review Denied
No. 16-0590/AF. U.S. v. Nicholas A.R.
Marsh. CCA 38688.
Miscellaneous Docket - Summary
Dispositions
No. 16-0728/AF. Sebastian P. LaBella, Appellant v. United
States, and United States Air Force Court of Appeals, Appellees. CCA 37679. On
consideration of Appellee's motion to dismiss writ-appeal petition as untimely
filed under Rule 19(e), and Appellant's motion for leave to withdraw the
writ-appeal petition, it is ordered that Appellee's motion to dismiss the
writ-appeal petition is hereby granted, and Appellant's motion for leave
to withdraw the writ-appeal petition is hereby denied as moot.
Interlocutory Orders
No. 16-0424/MC. U.S. v. Mark J. Rosario. CCA 201500251. On
consideration of Appellant's motion to supplement the petition for grant of
review, it is ordered that said motion is hereby granted. Appellee may file an
answer to the additional supplement to the petition for grant of review on or
before October 24, 2016.
No. 16-0555/AR. U.S. v. Jason M. Commisso. CCA
20140205. On consideration of Appellant's motion to enlarge the grant
and vacate the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals, it
is ordered that said motion is hereby granted as it pertains to enlarging the
grant but denied as it pertains to vacating the decision of the United States
Army Court of Criminal Appeals.
No. 16-0669/NA. U.S. v. Mark A. Berger.
CCA 201500024. On consideration of Appellant's motion
to supplement the petition for grant of review and motion to withdraw reply to
Appellee's opposition, it is ordered that said motions are hereby granted.
Appellee may file an answer to the additional supplement to the petition for
grant of review on or before October 24, 2016.
No. 16-0680/AR. U.S. v. Shquon T. Hodge. CCA
20160056. On consideration of Appellant's motion for leave to file the
supplement to the petition for grant of review out of time, it is ordered that
said motion is hereby granted. Appellee may file an answer to the supplement to
the petition for grant of review on or before October 24, 2016.
No. 16-0696/AR. U.S. v. William G. Inman. CCA
20150042. On consideration of Appellant's motion to attach exhibits and
motion to consider additional assignments of error out of time, it is
ordered that said motions are hereby granted. Appellee may file an answer
to the additional assignments of error on or before November 7, 2016.
No. 16-0705/AR. U.S. v. Sean R. Erikson. CCA
20150130. On consideration of Appellant's motion to consider matters
pursuant to United States v. Grostefon, 12 M.J. 431 (C.M.A. 1982), it is
ordered that said motion is hereby granted. Appellee may file an answer to the Grostefon
matters on or before October 24, 2016.
No. 16-0759/AR. U.S. v. Karina Flores-Santos. CCA
20140066. Appellant's motion to extend time to file a supplement to the
petition for grant of review granted to October 18, 2016.
No. 16-0762/AR. U.S. v. Tommie E. Crumedy. CCA
20140128. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to
the petition for grant of review, it is ordered that said motion is hereby
granted to October 20, 2016.
Petitions for Reconsideration Granted
No. 16-0635/AR. U.S.
v. Laith G. Cox. CCA
20130923. On consideration of
Appellant's petition for reconsideration of this Court's Order issued September
7, 2016, it is ordered that said petition for reconsideration is hereby
granted, and the petition for grant of review is hereby granted on the
following issues:
I.
WHETHER ACCEPTANCE OF APPOINTMENT AS A
CMCR JUDGE TERMINATED THE MILITARY COMMISSIONS OF JUDGE HERRING AND JUDGE
BURTON.
II.
WHETHER, AS APPOINTED JUDGES OF THE CMCR, JUDGE HERRING AND JUDGE BURTON MEET
THE UCMJ DEFINITION OF APPELLATE MILITARY JUDGE.
III.
WHETHER THE ASSIGNMENT OF INFERIOR OFFICERS AND PRINCIPAL OFFICERS TO A SINGLE
JUDICIAL TRIBUNAL ITSELF VIOLATES THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE.
No
briefs will be filed under Rule 25.
Home Page |
Opinions & Digest
| Daily
Journal | Scheduled
Hearings | Search
Site