Briefs of Granted Cases Without A Hearing Date


YOU ARE HERE: > HOME > BRIEFS OF GRANTED CASES WITHOUT A HEARING DATE
	BRIEFS OF GRANTED CASES WITHOUT A HEARING DATE (Last Updated 1/23/2025) In descending order, the following cases have been granted by this Court and ordered to file briefs. These cases have not yet been scheduled for hearings. Links to the briefs are provided soon after the briefs have been filed at this Court. Cases will be removed when a hearing date has been scheduled -- see Hearing Calendar -- or when another disposition has been published. See Daily Journal for complete court proceedings. Tuesday, January 21, 2025 Order Granting Petition for Review No. 25-0019/AR. U.S. v. Oscar A. Batres. CCA 20220223. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is granted on the following issue: WHETHER APPELLANT'S OFFENSES INVOLVED THE SAME VICTIM AND THE SAME TRANSACTION UNDER RULE FOR COURTS-MARTIAL 1002(d)(2)(B)(i) SUCH THAT THE MILITARY JUDGE ERRED IN ORDERING APPELLANT'S SEGMENTED SENTENCES TO RUN CONSECUTIVELY. Appellant's brief Appellee's brief Appellant's reply brief Monday, January 6, 2025 Certificate for Review No. 25-0073/AF. U.S. v. Joshua A. Patterson. CCA 40426. Notice is hereby given that a certificate for review of the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals was filed under Rule 22 on the following issue: WHERE TIME WAS NOT AN ESSENTIAL ELEMENT OF THE OFFENSE, DID THE AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS ERR BY FINDING FACTUAL INSUFFICIENCY BASED ON A DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE DATES PLEADED AND THE DATES PROVED, WHEN IT SHOULD HAVE APPLIED A VARIANCE ANALYSIS AND FOUND A NON-FATAL VARIANCE INSTEAD? Appellant's brief Appellee's brief Appellant's reply brief Monday, December 30, 2024 Order Granting Petition for Review No. 25-0024/AR. U.S. v. Nathan G. Leese. CCA 20230250. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is granted on the following issue: WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE AND THE ARMY COURT CORRECTLY APPLIED UNITED STATES v. PIERCE, 27 M.J. 367 (C.M.A. 1989) IN AWARDING CREDIT FOR APPELLANT'S TWO PRIOR INSTANCES OF NONJUDICIAL PUNISHMENT TO A SEGMENTED SENTENCE. Appellant's brief Appellee's brief Appellant's reply brief Monday, December 16, 2024 Order Granting Petition for Review No. 24-0226/CG. U.S. v. Eliud I. Lopez. CCA 1487. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is granted on the following issues: I. WHAT IS THE STANDARD OF REVIEW WHEN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES EVALUATES A DECISION OF A COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS ON A REQUEST FOR APPELLATE DISCOVERY? II. DID THE LOWER COURT ERR WHEN IT MOSTLY DENIED APPELLANT'S MOTIONS FOR APPELLATE DISCOVERY REGARDING HIS ILLEGAL POST-TRIAL CONFINEMENT, AFTER WHICH IT FOUND "SIMPLY NO EVIDENCE OF ANYTHING OTHER THAN NEGLIGENCE" REGARDING ITS CAUSE? III. WHETHER THE LOWER COURT ERRED IN ORDERING BACKPAY FOR APPELLANT'S ILLEGAL POST-TRIAL CONFINEMENT. Appellant's brief Appellee's brief Appellant's reply brief Wednesday, November 20, 2024 Order Granting Petition for Review No. 24-0234/AF. U.S. v. James L. Taylor, Jr. CCA 40371. 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 granted on the following issue: ARTICLE 2(d)(2), UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 802(d)(2), SETS FORTH THE AUTHORITY TO INVOLUNTARILY ORDER MEMBERS OF RESERVE COMPONENTS TO ACTIVE DUTY FOR TRIAL BY COURT-MARTIAL. DID THE AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS ERR BY USING THE ABSURDITY DOCTRINE TO INTERPRET THIS PROVISION IN A MANNER THAT CONFLICTS WITH THE PLAIN AND UNAMBIGUOUS MEANING OF THE STATUTORY LANGUAGE? Appellant's brief Appellee's brief Appellant's reply brief Friday, November 8, 2024 Order Granting Petition for Review No. 25-0004/MC. U.S. v. Joseph D. Suarez. CCA 202300049. 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 granted on the following issues: I. DID UNLAWFUL COMMAND INFLUENCE AFFECT APPELLANT'S COURT-MARTIAL? II. WAS TRIAL DEFENSE COUNSEL'S DEFICIENT PERFORMANCE PREJUDICIAL? III. DID APPELLANT WAIVE REVIEW OF THE QUESTION WHETHER UNLAWFUL INFLUENCE AFFECTED HIS COURT-MARTIAL? Appellant's brief Appellee's brief Appellant's reply brief Tuesday, October 22, 2024 Order Granting Petition for Review No. 24-0158/MC. U.S. v. Dominic L. Ruiz. CCA 202300007. 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 granted on the following issue: WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE ABUSED HER DISCRETION IN ADMITTING THE COMPLAINING WITNESS'S STATEMENT TO LAW ENFORCEMENT AS A PRIOR CONSISTENT STATEMENT UNDER M.R.E. 801(d)(1)(B)(ii). Appellant's brief Appellee's brief Appellant's reply brief Thursday, October 17, 2024 Order Granting Petition for Review No. 24-0182/AF. U.S. v. Tayari S. Vanzant. CCA 22004. On consideration of Appellant's 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 granted on the following issues: I. WHETHER THE AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS LACKED JURISDICTION TO REVIEW APPELLANT'S CASE. II. WHETHER THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES AND THE AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS HAVE JURISDICTION TO DIRECT MODIFICATION OF THE ERRONEOUS AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL FIREARM PROHIBITION UNDER 18 U.S.C. § 922 NOTED ON THE STAFF JUDGE ADVOCATE'S ENDORSEMENT TO THE ENTRY OF JUDGMENT. Appellant's brief (Issue I only) Appellee's brief Appellant's reply brief Friday, September 27, 2024 Order Granting Petition for Review No. 24-0196/NA. U.S. v. Edmond A. Maebane III. CCA 202200228. 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 granted on the following issue: DOES AN ACCUSED HAVE A SIXTH AMENDMENT RIGHT TO PRESENT EVIDENCE OF A RECORDED THIRD PARTY'S CONFESSION TO THE CRIME FOR WHICH THE ACCUSED IS ON TRIAL? Appellant's brief Appellee's brief Appellant's reply brief
	United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces • 450 E Street, NW Washington, DC 20442-0001 (202) 761-1448 / DSN 763-1448 • (202) 761-4672 fax