YOU ARE HERE: HOME > HEARING CALENDAR > OCTOBER 2018 TERM > FEBRUARY 2019

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

---

Tuesday, February 19, 2019

9:30 a.m.:

United States v.	Cedric L. McDonald	No. 18-0308/AR
(Appellee)	(Appellant)	(*audio -- wma mp3)

Counsel for Appellant: Capt Steven J. Dray, JA, USA (brief)
                                            -------------------------- (reply brief)
Counsel for Appellee:  Capt Sandra L. Ahinga, JA, USA (brief)    

Case Summary: GCM conviction of conspiracy to commit sexual assault and sexual assault. Granted issue questions whether the military judge erred in instructing the panel that a negligent mens rea was sufficient to make otherwise lawful conduct criminal.

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

Followed by:

United States v.	Michael C. Gleason	No. 18-0305/AR
(Appellee)	(Appellant)	(*audio -- wma mp3)

Counsel for Appellant: Robert A. Feldmeier, Esq.
                                         --------------------- (brief) (reply brief)
Counsel for Appellee:  Capt Natanyah Ganz, JA, USA (brief)    

Case Summary: GCM conviction of aggravated assault, assault consummated by a battery, adultery and wrongfully interfering with an emergency call. Granted issue questions whether the Army Court erred by affirming a novel specification covered by an enumerated Art. 134, UCMJ offense.

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

---

Thursday, February 21, 2019

9:30 a.m.:

United States v.	Juventino Tovarchavez	No. 18-0371/AR
(Appellee)	(Appellant)	(*audio -- wma mp3)

Counsel for Appellant: Capt M. Augustus Turner, JA, USA (brief)
                                              ------------------------------- (reply brief)
Counsel for Appellee:  Capt Kendra J.H. Harris, JA, USA (brief)    

Case Summary: GCM conviction of sexual assault. Granted issue questions whether the Army Court erred, first, in finding that this Court overruled sub silencio the Supreme Court holding in Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18, 24 (1967), and this Court's own holdings in United States v. Wolford, 62 M.J. 418, 420 (C.A.A.F. 2006), and in United States v. Hills, 75 M.J. 350, 357 (C.A.A.F. 2016), and, consequently, in testing for prejudice in this case using the standard for nonconstitutional error.

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

Followed by:

United States v.	Paul D. Voorhees	No. 18-0372/AF
(Appellee)	(Appellant)	(*audio -- wma mp3)

Counsel for Appellant: Terri R. Zimmermann, Esq. (brief)
Counsel for Appellee:  Capt Anne M. Delmare, USAF (brief)    

Case Summary: GCM convictions of conduct unbecoming an officer and gentleman. Granted issues question: (1) whether the AFCCA erred in finding no plain error despite trial counsel's argument on findings that personally attacked appellant and trial defense counsel, commented on Appellant's silence, expressed his personal opinions, bolstered his own credibility, vouched for government witnesses, speculated, and made reference to facts not in evidence; (2) whether the AFCCA erred in finding that the specifications alleging violations of Article 133, UCMJ, stated an offense despite the fact that they lack words of criminality or a mens rea; and (3) whether plain error occurred when the military judge failed to instruct the members that mens rea was an element of an offense under Article 133.

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