YOU ARE HERE: HOME > HEARING CALENDAR > OCTOBER 2017 TERM > NOVEMBER 2017

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

---

Wednesday, November 8, 2017

4:00 p.m.:

United States v.	Tyler G. Eppes	17-0364/AF
(Appellee)	(Appellant)	(audio)

Counsel for Appellant: William E. Cassara, Esq. (brief) (reply brief)
Counsel for Appellee:  Lt Col Joseph Kubler, USAF (brief)

Brief of Amicus Curiae -- Seantyel Hardy and Angelica Nguyen

Case Summary: GCM conviction of conspiracy, false official statements, larceny, making false claims, and conduct unbecoming. Granted issues question: (1) whether the search of Appellant's personal bags exceeded the scope of the search authorization where the agent requested authority to search Appellant's person, personal bags, and automobile, but the military magistrate authorized only the search of Appellant's person and automobile and did not authorize the search of Appellant's personal bags and (2) whether Appellant's right to freedom from unreasonable search and seizure under the Fourth Amendment was violated when there was no probable cause for the 7 December 2012 warrant.

NOTE: Counsel for each side will be allotted 20 minutes to present oral argument. Project Outreach case to be heard at Cornell Law School, Ithaca, New York.

---

Tuesday, November 28, 2017

9:30 a.m.:

United States v.	David L. Jerkins	17-0203/AR
(Appellee)	(Appellant)	(audio)

Counsel for Appellant: Robert A. Feldmeier, Esq. (brief)
                                         ---------------------------- (reply brief)
Counsel for Appellee:  Capt Allison L. Rowley, JA, USA (brief)

Case Summary: GCM conviction of assault on a child. Granted issue questions whether the military judge abused her discretion by allowing a general officer memorandum of reprimand into sentencing evidence, where the reprimand was issued two weeks before the court-martial and contained highly prejudicial and misleading language.

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

Followed by:

United States v.	Jorge F. Acevedo	17-0224/AR
(Appellee)	(Appellant)	(audio)

Counsel for Appellant: Capt Bryan A. Osterhage, JA, USA (brief)
                                        ------------------------------------- (reply brief)
Counsel for Appellee:  Capt Jennifer A. Donahue, JA, USA (brief)

Case Summary: GCM conviction of kidnapping. The issue granted with briefs questions whether the evidence is legally insufficient to support a charge of kidnapping by inveiglement.

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

---

Wednesday, November 29, 2017

9:30 a.m.:

United States v.	Torrence A. Robinson	17-0231/AR
(Appellee)	(Appellant)	(audio)

Counsel for Appellant: Capt Cody Cheek, JA, USA (brief) (reply brief)
Counsel for Appellee:  Capt Cassandra M. Resposo, JA, USA (brief)

Brief of Amicus Curiae -- Protect Our Defenders

Case Summary: GCM conviction of fraternization and sexual assault. Granted issues question: (1) whether the miltiary judge erred by failing to admit constitutionally required evidence under Military Rule of Evidence 412(b)(1)(C), and (2) whether the military judge committed plain error when he failed to instruct the panel on the mens rea required for the specification of Charge 1, which involved an Article 92, UCMJ, violation of Army Regulation 600-20, and (3) Issue specified by the court: whether the evidence was legally sufficient to establish that Appellant knew or reasonably should have known that SPC VM was too intoxicated to consent to a sexual act.

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

Followed by:

United States v.	Randy L. Simpson, Jr.	No.17-0329/AR
(Appellant)	(Appellee)	(audio)

Counsel for Appellant: Capt Tara O'Brien Goble, JA, USA (brief)
                                          ---------------------------------- (reply brief)
Counsel for Appellee:  Capt Ryan Yoder, JA, USA (brief)

Case Summary: GCM conviction of conspiracy and larceny. The Judge Advocate General of the Army certified the following issue: whether the Army Court of Criminal Appeals erred by finding a substantial basis in law and fact to question Appellant's plea in light of the Supreme Court decision in United States v. Shaw, 137 S.Ct. 462 (2016), and the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces decision in United States v. Cimball-Sharpton, 73 M.J. 299 (C.A.A.F. 2014).

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