YOU ARE HERE: HOME > HEARING CALENDAR > SEPTEMBER 2011 TERM > May 2012

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

---

Tuesday, May 15, 2012

9:30 a.m.:

United States v.	Evan Vela	No. 12-0194/AR
(Appellee)	(Appellant)	(audio)

Counsel for Appellant: Daniel Conway, Esq. (brief)
Counsel for Appellee:  Capt Chad Fisher, JA, USA (brief)

Case Summary:  GCM conviction of unpremeditated murder, making a false official statement and wrongfully placing an AK-47 with remains of an Iraqi. Granted issues question (1) whether the military judge erred in denying the defense's motion to dismiss or disqualify under United States v. Kastigar; and (2) whether the evidence was legally insufficient to support the findings of guilty to Charge III.

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

Followed by:

United States v.	Ermen-Rene Barnett	No. 12-0251/AF
(Appellee)	(Appellant)	(audio)

Counsel for Appellant: Maj Michael S. Kerr, USAF (brief)
Counsel for Appellee: Capt Brian C. Mason, USAF (brief)

Case Summary:  GCM conviction of recruiter misconduct, use of marijuana and dereliction of duty. Granted issue questions whether the military judge abused his discretion when he informed the members of Appellant's illegal pretrial punishment credit and then failed to instruct the members based on a submitted question that they were not allowed to nullify some or all of that credit by increasing the sentence.

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

---

Wednesday, May 16, 2012

9:30 a.m.:

United States v.	Jeremy L. Rauscher	No. 12-0172/NA
(Appellee)	(Appellant)	(audio)

Counsel for Appellant: Capt Michael D. Berry, USMC (brief)
Counsel for Appellee: Capt David N. Roberts, USMC (brief)

Case Summary:  GCM conviction of disobeying a non-commissioned officer, using provoking words, assault and communicating a threat. Granted issue for review is as follows: Appellant was charged with, inter alia, assault with intent to commit murder under Article 134, UCMJ.  But the specification failed to allege the terminal element. The members found Appellant not guilty of the charged offense, but guilty of aggravated assault under Article 128, UCMJ, as a lesser-included offense. Did the lower court err in holding that aggravated assault is a lesser-included offense of an Article 134 specification that fails to allege the terminal element?

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

Followed by:

United States v.	Benny Norwood, Jr.	No. 11-0515/MC
(Appellee)	(Appellant)	(audio)

Counsel for Appellant: Maj Jeffrey R. Liebenguth, USMC (brief)
                       ---------------------------------------------------(reply brief)
Counsel for Appellee: Col Kurt J. Brubaker, USMC (brief)

Case Summary:  GCM conviction of attempted adultery, conspiracy, making a false official statement and committing an indecent act. Granted issues question: (1) whether, in light of United States v. Fosler, 70 M.J. 225 (C.A.A.F. 2011), the specifications alleging attempted adultery and conspiracy to obstruct justice state offenses; and (2) whether in order to state an offense of attempt or conspiracy under Articles 80 and 81, the specification is required to expressly allege each element of the predicate offense.

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