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

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

---

Wednesday, October 16, 2019

12:00 p.m.:

United States v.	Robert J. Rice	No. 19-0178/AR
(Appellee)	(Appellant)	(*audio -- mp3 wma)

Counsel for Appellant:  Stephen I. Vladeck, Esq. (brief)
                                         ----------------------- (reply brief)
Counsel for Appellee:  MAJ Catharine Parnell, JA, USA (brief)

Case Summary: GCM conviction for knowingly and wrongfully possessing and distributing images of child pornography, such conduct being of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces. Granted issue questions whether the double jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment requires dismissal of Appellant's convictions.

NOTE: This case will be heard as a Project Outreach case at J. Reuben Clark Law School at Brigham Young University in Provo, Utah. Counsel for each side will be allotted 20 minutes to present oral argument.

---

Tuesday, October 22, 2019

9:30 a.m.:

United States v.	Timothy B. Hennis	No. 17-0263/AR
(Appellee)	(Appellant)	(*audio part 1 --         mp3 wma, part 2 -- mp3 wma)

Counsel for Appellant: MAJ Timothy G. Burroughs, Jr., USA
                                    Mr. Jonathan F. Potter, Esq. (brief)
                                        --------------------------- (reply brief)
Counsel for Appellee:  MAJ Catharine M. Parnell, JA, USA (brief)

Case Summary: GCM conviction before a panel with enlisted representation of three specifications of premeditated murder. Appellant was sentenced to death and the case is before the Court for mandatory review under Article 67(a)(1), UCMJ. Granted issues question (1) whether a break in Appellant's service foreclosed the exercise of court-martial jurisdiction; (2) whether the charges arose in the Armed Forces, and fell within the subject matter jurisdiction of a capital court-martial; (3) whether the court-martial had personal jurisdiction over Appellant; (4) whether the military judge denied appellant a meaningful opportunity to present a complete defense; and (5) whether the military judge abused his discretion in restricting defense counsel's voir dire and in denying defense challenges for cause.

NOTE: Counsel for each side will be allotted 60 minutes to present oral argument.

---

Wednesday, October 23, 2019

9:00 a.m.:

United States v.	Pedro M. Bess, Jr.	No. 19-0086/NA
(Appellee)	(Appellant)	(*audio -- mp3 wma)

Counsel for Appellant: LT Clifton E. Morgan, III, JAGC, USN (brief)
                                            ------------------------------------ (reply brief)
Counsel for Appellee:  LT Kurt W. Siegal, JAGC, USN (brief)

Brief of Amicus Curiae -- NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund, Inc.

Case Summary: GCM conviction of committing indecent acts. Granted issues question (1) whether the convening authority's selection of members violated the equal protection requirements of the Fifth Amendment; (2) whether the convening authority's selection of members constituted unlawful command influence; and (3) whether the lower court erred in affirming the military judge's denial of Appellant's motion to produce evidence of the racial makeup of potential members.

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

Followed by:

United States v.	Alan S. Guardado	No. 19-0139/AR
(Appellee)	(Appellant)	(*audio -- mp3 wma)

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

Case Summary: GCM conviction of indecent liberties with a child, assault consummated by battery on a child, indecent language and indecent acts on a child. Granted issue questions whether the military judge abused his discretion by failing to grant Appellant Article 13, UCMJ, credit in consequence of the Howell v. United States, 75 M.J. 386 (C.A.A.F. 2016) violation present here.

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