YOU ARE HERE: HOME > HEARING CALENDAR > SEPTEMBER 2009 TERM > MARCH 2010

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

---

Tuesday, March 2, 2010

9:30 am

United States v.	David W. Serianne	No. 10-5001/NA
(Appellee)	(Appellant)	(audio)

Counsel for Appellant: Capt Robert E. Eckert, Jr., USMC
Counsel for Appellee: LT Michael Maffei, JAGC, USN

Case Summary: The military judge granted Appellee’s motion to dismiss Charge I and the sole specification because the reporting requirement in Chief of Naval Operations Instruction (OPNAVINST) 5350.4C violates Appellant’s rights under the Fifth Amendment. Appellant filed an appeal with the Court of Criminal Appeals pursuant to Article 62, Uniform Code of Military Justice. On November 25, 2009, the Court of Criminal Appeals denied the Government’s appeal and held that the military judge did not err as a matter of law in dismissing Charge I and the specification thereunder. The Judge Advocate General of the Navy certified the following issues (1) whether the Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals erroneously held that the duty imposed on sailors by Chief of Naval Operations Instruction 5350.4C to notify their commanding officer of an arrest by civil authority for an alcohol-related offense compelled a testimonial communication that was incriminating; and (2) whether the Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals erroneously held that no exception to the Fifth Amendment self-incrimination clause, including the regulatory exception developed in California v. Byers , applies to the reporting requirement in Chief of Naval Operations Instruction 5350.4C.

NOTE: Counsel for each side will be allotted 20 minutes to present oral argument.

Followed by:

United States v.	Matthew M. Diaz	No. 09-0535/NA
(Appellee)	(Appellant)	(audio)

Counsel for Appellant: Kathleen L. Purcell, Esq.
Counsel for Appellee: LT Brian C. Burgtorf, JAGC, USN

Case Summary: GCM conviction of mailing classified information, conduct unbecoming and officer, communicating classified information, and removing classified material. Granted issues question (1) whether the lower courts misread the scienter and national security elements of the Espionage Act; (2) whether the military judge abused his discretion in rejecting as irregular Appellant’s proferred guilty plea to a violation of Article 133; (3) whether the evidence of the circumstances under which an accused acted, including his motive, is relevant to a charge under Article 133.

NOTE: Counsel for each side will be allotted 20 minutes to present oral argument.

---

Thursday, March 4, 2010

9:30 am

United States v.	Rob B. Yammine	No. 09-0720/MC
(Appellee)	(Appellant)	(audio)

Counsel for Appellant: LT Brian D. Korn, JAGC, USN
Counsel for Appellee: Capt Robert E. EcKert, Jr., USMC

Case Summary: GCM conviction of forcible sodomy on a child, and larceny of government property. Granted issue questions whether the military judge abused his discretion when he admitted evidence of file names found on Appellant’s computer that were suggestive of having contained child pornography but whose actual content was unknown, allowing the government to argue Appellant’s propensity or motive to commit sodomy or indecent acts with a minor.

NOTE: Counsel for each side will be allotted 20 minutes to present oral argument.