YOU ARE HERE: HOME > HEARING CALENDAR > 2008 TERM (TRANSITION) >NOVEMBER 2007
United States Court of Appeals
for the Armed Forces
450 E Street, Northwest Washington D.C. 20442-0001
Monday, November 5, 2007
9:00 a.m.
United States v.
John S. Freeman No. 06-0833/AF (Appellee) (Appellant) (audio) Counsel for Appellant: Capt Vicki A. Belleau, USAF
Counsel for Appellee: Col Gerald R. Bruce, USAFCase Summary: GCM conviction of assault and making a false official statement. Granted issues question: (1) whether the military judge erred in failing to suppress Appellant’s confession where the confession was not freely and voluntarily given; (2) whether the military judge abused his discretion by denying the defense request for the appointment of a forensically-qualified expert consultant; and (3) whether the military judge erred by admitting evidence of uncharged misconduct and bad character in violation of military rule of evidence 404(b).
Followed by:
United States v.
Steven M. Cucuzzella No. 07-0397/AF (Appellee) (Appellant) (audio) Counsel for Appellant: Capt Anthony D. Ortiz, USAF
Counsel for Appellee: Maj Matthew S. Ward, USAFCase Summary: GCM conviction of rape and assault. Granted issue questions whether the military judge erred in admitting RC’s statements to the registered nurse and social worker as medical exceptions to hearsay.
NOTE: Counsel for each side will be allowed 15 minutes to present oral argument in this case.
9:00 a.m.
United States v.
Anthony L. Reed No. 07-0114/AR (Appellee) (Appellant) (audio) Counsel for Appellant: Maj Fansu Ku, JA, USA
Counsel for Appellee: Capt Larry W. Downend, JA, USACase Summary: GCM conviction of making a false official statement, larceny, and making a false claim. Granted issue questions whether the military judge erred in his findings of fact or conclusions of law regarding unlawful command influence.
Followed by:
United States v.
Josh R. Harcrow No. 07-0135/MC (Appellee) (Appellant) (audio) Counsel for Appellant: Maj Jeffrey S. Stephens, USMC
Counsel for Appellee: Capt James W. Weirick, USMCCase Summary: GCM conviction of AWOL, possession of drug paraphernalia, cocaine and heroin, use of methamphetamine and cocaine, manufacturing methamphetamine, and escaping custody. Granted issue questions whether the lower court erred by finding that two Virginia state forensic laboratory reports were not testimonial hearsay under Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004).
9:00 a.m.
United States v.
Eric Lopez de Victoria No. 07-6004/AR (Appellee) (Appellant) (audio) Counsel for Appellant: Capt Nathan J. Bankson, JA, USA
Counsel for Appellee: Capt James P. Leary, JA, USACase Summary: GCM conviction of making a false official statement, indecent acts with a child and indecent liberties with a child. In a post-trial Article 39(a) session, the military judge ruled that the statute of limitations barred the convictions for indecent acts and liberties with a child because a 2003 congressional amendment did not apply retroactively to offenses committed before the date of the amendment. In an appeal under Article 62, UCMJ, the Army Court of Criminal Appeals held that the trial judge erred. The granted issue questions whether the Army Court of Criminal Appeals erred in holding that the November 2003 congressional amendment to Article 43(b) of the UCMJ applies retroactively to offenses committed before the effective date of the amendment that were not time-barred as of that date, but that were time-barred under the previous statute of limitations when received by the officer exercising summary court-martial jurisdiction. The Court also specified the issue of whether and how this Court has statutory authority to exercise jurisdiction over interlocutory appeals under either Article 67(a) (2) or (3), UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 867 (a) (2), (3) (2000), from decisions of the Courts of Criminal Appeals under Article 62, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 862 (2000), and whether, as a matter of law, this Court’s decision in United States v. Tucker, 20 M.J. 52, 53 (C.M.A. 1985), should be overturned.
Followed by:
United States v.
Joshua M. Michael No. 07-6005/NA (Appellee) (Appellant) (audio pt 1, pt 2) Counsel for Appellant: Lance B. Sigmon, Esq.
Counsel for Appellee: LCDR Paul D. Bunge, JAGC, USNCase Summary: After arraignment of Appellant at a general court-martial on charges of receiving and possessing child pornography, the military judge granted a defense motion to suppress the contents of Appellant’s personal computer. In an appeal under Article 62, UCMJ, the Court of Criminal Appeals held that the military judge abused his discretion in granting the motion. The granted issue questions whether the Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals erroneously limited this Court’s holding in United States v. Conklin, 63 M.J. 333 (C.A.A.F. 2006), by finding that “it appears the military judge applied an erroneous standard of reasonableness” in suppressing the search of Appellant’s laptop computer. The Court also specified the issue of whether and how this Court has statutory authority to exercise jurisdiction over interlocutory appeals under either Article 67(a) (2) or (3), UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 867 (a) (2), (3) (2000), from decisions of the Courts of Criminal Appeals under Article 62, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 862 (2000), and whether, as a matter of law, this Court’s decision in United States v. Tucker, 20 M.J. 52, 53 (C.M.A. 1985), should be overturned.
9:00 a.m.
United States v.
John R. Larson No. 07-0263/AF (Appellee) (Appellant) (audio) Counsel for Appellant: Capt Timothy M. Cox, USAF
Counsel for Appellee: Capt Jamie L. Mendelson, USAFCase Summary: GCM conviction of attempted carnal knowledge, attempted indecent acts, misuse of a government computer, indecent language, and using a facility to entice a minor to engage in sexual activity. Granted issues are: whether the AFCCA erred in holding that Appellant had no reasonable expectation of privacy in his government computer despite the Court’s holding in United States v. Long, 64 M.J. 57 (C.A.A.F. 2006); and whether Appellant was denied the effective assistance of counsel when civilian counsel conceded Appellant’s guilt in his opening statement, during findings, and again in closing argument.
Followed by:
United States v.
Kerry T. Wright No. 07-0412/AR (Appellee) (Appellant) (audio) Counsel for Appellant: Maj Leonard W. Jones, JA, USA
Counsel for Appellee: Maj Dana E. Leavitt, JA, USACase Summary: GCM conviction of larceny, and making a false official statement. Granted issue questions whether the Army Court of Criminal Appeals erred in finding Appellant’s plea of guilty to the specification of Charge I and to Charge I, false official statement, provident when the statement in question was not, in fact, false.
NOTE: Counsel for each side will be allowed 15 minutes to present oral argument in this case.
| Hearings have been scheduled on the following dates. All scheduled hearings will include case summaries. These hearings will be held in the courtroom located on the second floor of the Courthouse, 450 E Street, Northwest, Washington, D.C. 20442-0001, unless otherwise noted. Audio recordings of hearings normally will be available on this page the day following the hearing.
|
(202) 761-1448 / DSN 763-1448 • (202) 761-4672 fax