YOU ARE HERE: HOME > HEARING CALENDAR > SEPTEMBER 2008 TERM > FEBRUARY 2009

United States Court of Appeals
for the Armed Forces
450 E Street, Northwest Washington D.C. 20442-0001

---

Tuesday, February 3, 2009

12:00 p.m.

United States v.	Gustavo A. Delarosa	No. 08-0390/NA
(Appellee)	(Appellant)	(audio)

Counsel for Appellant: LT Brian D. Korn , JAGC, USN
Counsel for Appellee: Maj Elizabeth A. Harvey, USMC

Amicus Curiae for Appellant: Mr. Preston Jones, Law Student

Case Summary: GCM conviction of aggravated assault. Granted issue questions whether (1) the lower court erred in adopting a test to determine whether Appellant’s assertion of his right to remain silent was scrupulously honored that differs from the tests set forth by the United States Supreme Court in Michigan v. Mosley, 423 U.S. 96 (1975) and United States v. Watkins, 34 M.J. 344 (C.M.A. 1992); and (2) whether the lower court erred in holding that the military judge correctly denied the defense motion to suppress Appellant’s confession made to the detectives at the Norfolk, Virginia, police department.

NOTE: This case will be heard at Southern Methodist University, Dedman School of Law, Dallas, Texas as part of the Court’s Project Outreach. Each side will be allotted 20 minutes to present oral argument.

---

Thursday, February 5, 2009

12:00 p.m.

United States v.	Stephen P. Chatfield	No. 08-0615/NA
(Appellee)	(Appellant)	(audio)

Counsel for Appellant: LT Kathleen L. Kadlec, JAGC, USN
Counsel for Appellee: Capt Geoffrey S. Shows, USMC

Amicus Curiae for Appellant: Ms. Natasha Nisttahuz, Law Student
Amicus Curiae for Appellee: Mr. Jonathan C. Clark, Law Student

Case Summary: GCM conviction of indecent assault. Granted issues question: (1) whether the lower court erred in holding that the military judge did not abuse his discretion in failing to suppress Appellant’s statement to civilian authorities as involuntary; and (2) whether the lower court erred in holding that the evidence was legally sufficient to affirm Appellant’s conviction.

NOTE: This case will be heard at Texas Tech University, School of Law, Lubbock, Texas as part of the Court’s Project Outreach. Each side will be allotted 20 minutes to present oral argument.

---

Tuesday, February 10, 2009

9:30 a.m.

United States v.	Carrie N. Riddle	No. 08-0739/AR
(Appellee)	(Appellant)	(audio)

Counsel for Appellant: William M. Fischbach, III, Esq.
Counsel for Appellee: Capt James M. Hudson, JA USA

Case Summary: GCM conviction of AWOL and use of marijuana. Granted issue questions whether Appellant’s pleas to all charges and specifications were provident because the military judge did not explain or discuss the defense of lack of mental responsibility, did not satisfy himself that counsel had evaluated the viability of the defense, and did not elicit facts from Appellant that negated the defense.

NOTE: Counsel for each side will be allowed 20 minutes to present oral argument in this case.

Followed by:

United States v.	Jesse I. Ranney	No. 08-0596/AF
(Appellee)	(Appellant)	(audio)

Counsel for Appellant: Capt Tiffany M. Wagner, USAF
Counsel for Appellee: Capt Naomi N. Porterfield, USAF

Case Summary: SPCM conviction of disobeying an officer and an NCO. Granted issues question: (1) whether the evidence is legally sufficient to support the finding of guilty for disobeying a lawful command where there was no evidence that the command was directed personally to Appellant or that Appellant knew it was from a superior commissioned officer; and (2) whether the order in the specification of Charge II was a lawful order when the evidence indicated the order’s purpose was to accomplish some private end.

NOTE: Counsel for each side will be allowed 20 minutes to present oral argument in this case.

---

Wednesday, February 25, 2009

9:30 a.m.

United States v.	Harvey A. Gardinier II	No.06-0591/AR
(Appellee)	(Appellant)	(audio)

Counsel for Appellant: Capt William Jeremy Stephens, JA, USA
Counsel for Appellee: Capt Philip M. Staten, JA, USA

Case Summary: GCM conviction of indecent liberties with a child and indecent acts with a child. On March 31, 2006, the Army Court affirmed the findings of guilty and the sentence. United States v. Gardinier, 63 M.J. 531 (A. Ct. Crim. App. 2006). This Court set aside the Army Court’s decision on June 6, 2007, and remanded the case to the Army Court. United States v. Gardinier, 65 M.J. 60 (C.A.A.F. 2007). Granted issue questions whether the Army Court erred when it found the military judge’s erroneous admissions of evidence harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.

NOTE: Counsel for each side will be allowed 20 minutes to present oral argument in this case.

Followed by:

United States v.	Brandon I. Miller	No. 08-0580/AR
(Appellee)	(Appellant)	(audio)

Counsel for Appellant: Capt Melissa E. Goforth Koenig, JA, USA
Counsel for Appellee: Capt Patrick G. Broderick, JA, USA

Case Summary: SPCM conviction for resisting apprehension, AWOL, assaulting an NCO, and using provoking speech. The Court of Criminal Appeals (CCA) set aside the conviction of resisting apprehension due to factual insufficiency of the evidence and affirmed in its place the Article 134, UCMJ, offense of a simple disorder. The CCA also dismissed the provoking speech offense. Granted issue questions whether, after finding the evidence factually insufficient to support a finding of guilty to Charge III and its specification (resisting apprehension), the CCA could affirm a finding of guilty to a lesser included offense on a theory not presented to the trier of fact.

NOTE: Counsel for each side will be allowed 20 minutes to present oral argument in this case.