YOU ARE HERE: HOME > HEARING CALENDAR > SEPTEMBER 2012 TERM > MARCH 2013

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

---

Tuesday, March 12, 2013

9:30 a.m.:

United States v.	Walter S. Coleman	No. 13-0007/AR
(Appellee)	(Appellant)	(audio)

Counsel for Appellant: Capt Robert N. Michaels, JA, USA (brief)                           ------------------------------------------- (reply brief)
Counsel for Appellee: Capt Bradley M. Endicott, JA, USA (brief)

Case Summary: GCM conviction of rape and adultery. The Court of Criminal Appeals set aside the adultery conviction. Granted issue questions whether the military judge erred in failing to grant a defense motion for mistrial based on the trial counsel's failure to disclose that Appellant's co-accused testified against him in exchange for the staff judge advocate's recommendation that his sentence be reduced by twelve months.

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

Followed by:

United States v.	Wilson Medina	No. 13-5002/CG
(Appellant)	(Appellee)	(audio)

Counsel for Appellant: LCDR Vasilios Tasikas, USCG (brief)                            ------------------------------------- (reply brief)
Counsel for Appellee: LCDR Paul R. Casey, USCG (brief)

Case Summary: GCM conviction of assault and sodomy. Certified issues question: (1) whether the Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals erred by applying the providence inquiry requirements of Hartman in a case where the facts elicited during the providence inquiry revealed that the sexual activity fell outside of the constitutional protections bounded by Lawrence v. Texas because it involved a recent, prior trainer-trainee relationship and (2) assuming a Hartman inquiry is required, what constitutes a sufficient colloquy between the military judge and an accused to support a plea of guilty to the specification of sodomy under the standard set forth in Hartman?

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

---

Wednesday, March 20, 2013

12:00 p.m.:

United States v.	Allen J. Solomon	No. 13-0025/MC
(Appellee)	(Appellant)	(audio)

Counsel for Appellant: LT Ryan C. Mattina, JAGC, USN (brief)                            ---------------------------------------- (reply brief)
Counsel for Appellee:  Maj David Roberts, USMC (brief)

Case Summary: GCM conviction of aggravated sexual contact, indecent conduct, drunk and disorderly conduct, obstruction of justice, failure to obey an order and use of ecstasy. The Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals set aside the drunk and disorderly and the obstruction of justice convictions and affirmed the conviction of the other charges. Granted issues are: (1) in a case involving sexual misconduct committed against a male victim, the military judge admitted extensive evidence under M.R.E. 404(b) and M.R.E. 413 that related to Appellant's previous acquittal for sexual misconduct committed against two females, despite alibi evidence that contradicted his involvement in the sexual misconduct with them. Did the military judge abuse his discretion in admitting the prior sexual misconduct evidence? and (2) during the trial counsel's closing and rebuttal argument, he expressed personal opinions on the evidence, vouched for the veracity of the government witnesses, ridiculed the defense's case theory, argued facts not in evidence, and claimed that the defense cross-examinations were disingenuous. Did his improper conduct constitute prosecutorial misconduct and did it materially prejudice Appellant's substantial rights?

NOTE: Counsel for each side will be allotted 20 minutes to present oral argument. This case will be heard at the U.S. Naval Academy, Annapolis, MD, as part of Project Outreach.