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

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

---

Tuesday, March 17, 2009

9:30 a.m.

United States v.	Darrel A. Weston	No. 08-0594/MC
(Appellee)	(Appellant)	(audio)

Counsel for Appellant: Maj Richard D. Belliss, USMC
Counsel for Appellee: Capt Geoffrey S. Shows, USMC

Case Summary: GCM conviction of housebreaking and invasion of privacy. Granted issues question whether: (1) whether the lower court erred in holding that Georgia v. Randolph, 547 U.S. 103 (2006), does not apply to the consent search of Appellant’s marital home where agents from the Marine Corps’ Criminal Investigation Division (CID) first received Appellant’s unequivocal objection to a search of his marital home and then obtained consent from Appellant’s wife, both of whom were physically located in separate interrogation rooms in CID’s building at Marine Corps Base Kaneohe Bay, Hawaii; (2) whether, assuming arguendo that the search of Appellant’s marital home was unreasonable in light of Georgia v. Randolph, 547 U.S. 103 (2006), the lower court erred in holding that the inevitable discovery exception to the exclusionary rule would allow admission of the seized evidence.

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

Followed by:

United States v.	Manasses A. Paige	No. 08-0805/MC
(Appellee)	(Appellant)	(audio)

Counsel for Appellant: Capt Kyle R. Kilian, USMC
Counsel for Appellee: LT Timothy H. Delgado, JAGC, USN

Case Summary: GCM conviction of disrespect to an NCO, violating a lawful general order, dereliction of duty, rape, assault and battery, and breaking restriction. Granted issue questions whether trial counsel committed plain error during his closing argument on the merits when he commented that the government’s evidence was uncontradicted, thereby indirectly commenting on Appellant’s failure to testify and produce evidence in his defense.

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