No. 01-0176/NA. U.S. v. Jannas E. BROWN-COLLINS. CCA 98-0503.

No. 01-0177/MC. U.S. v. Darius T. HILL. CCA 99-1216.

No. 00-0672/AF. U.S. v. Lori S. THORNTON. CCA S29598.

No. 00-0682/AR. U.S. v. Teresa M. BRONNER. CCA 9700202.

No. 00-0703/AR. U.S. v. Thomas R. MULKEY. CCA 9900797.

No. 00-0706/AR. U.S. v. Dennis F. SUESUE. CCA 9801343.

No. 00-0711/AR. U.S. v. Marcus D. CLARK. CCA 9801627.

No. 00-0719/AF. U.S. v. Daniel A. HARTIN, Jr. CCA 33139.

No. 01-0005/AR. U.S. v. Dominique O. MCCLELLAN. CCA 20000128.

No. 01-0016/AR. U.S. v. Robert S. ANDERSON. CCA 9900105.

No. 01-0018/AR. U.S. v. Roger W. ADAMSON. CCA 9900740.

No. 01-0021/NA. U.S. v. Daniel POZOS. CCA 99-1079.

No. 01-0028/MC. U.S. v. Wing L. NG. CCA 99-1226.

No. 01-0029/AR. U.S. v. Joseph H. HARDY. CCA 9900789.

No. 01-0031/AR. U.S. v. Tobey S. FLORES III. CCA 9800908.

No. 01-0033/AR. U.S. v. Nathaniel E. TEASLEY. CCA 9900455.

No. 01-0037/AF. U.S. v. Suraj H. PANDYA. CCA 33977.

No. 01-0039/AF. U.S. v. Claude A. BRICE. CCA 34042.

No. 01-0040/AF. U.S. v. Blaine E. BURRELL. CCA S29772.

No. 01-0041/AF. U.S. v. Roger W. HEDRICK. CCA 33336.

No. 01-0048/AR. U.S. v. Arnold R. HASKINS. CCA 9801817.

No. 01-0052/AF. U.S. v. Scott G. BRUNNER. CCA S29801.

No. 01-0054/AF. U.S. v. Adam A. CROUSE. CCA S29779.

No. 01-0060/MC. U.S. v. Joseph N. SCHAFER. CCA 200000109.

No. 01-0065/AF. U.S. v. Vincent A. ARGENTO. CCA 34167.

No. 01-0070/AF. U.S. v. Steven T. VILLAFLOR. CCA 34111.

No. 01-0075/AF. U.S. v. Jason ELLIS. CCA 34087.

No. 01-0078/MC. U.S. v. Christopher KELLEY. CCA 20-0052.

No. 01-0079/NA. U.S. v. Michael J. ELBURN. CCA 20-0085.

No. 01-0080/MC. U.S. v. Bryan P. DUGAS. CCA 20-0409.

No. 01-0081/AR. U.S. v. Fetina R. SMITH. CCA 9900198.

No. 01-0106/AR. U.S. v. Kevin YZAGUIRRE. CCA 20000026.

No. 01-0111/AR. U.S. v. Yolanda A. MERCHANT. CCA 20000194.

No. 01-0113/AR. U.S. v. Noel J. GUILFORD. CCA 20000132.

No. 01-0175/AR. U.S. v. Joseph ANDERSON III. CCA 20000003.

No. 01-0171/AF. U.S. v. Timothy E. NARDI. CCA 34044.

No. 01-0172/AF. U.S. v. Brandon J. CATLEDGE. CCA S29839.

No. 01-0173/AF. U.S. v. Clifford C. ROBOTHAM, II. CCA S29812.

No. 01-0174/AF. U.S. v. Leo E. SATTERWHITE. CCA 34164.

No. 00-0544/NA. U.S. v. Dennis S. MCDONALD. CCA 98-2175. Appellee's motion to extend time to file an answer to final brief granted to January 22, 2001; absent extraordinary circumstances no further extension of time will be granted in this case.

No. 01-0114/AR. U.S. v. Patrick A. BARKLEY. CCA 9900910. Appellant's motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted to January 22, 2001.

No. 01-0119/AR. U.S. v. Timothy A. BURCH. CCA 9801133. Appellant's motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted to January 29, 2001.

No. 01-0168/AR. U.S. v. Thomas W. ARMSTRONG. CCA 9600445.

No. 01-0169/MC. U.S. v. Denise L. ALLEN. CCA 88-3507.

No. 01-0170/AR. U.S. v. Valerie D. COES. CCA 20000233.

Misc. No. 01-8009/MC. U.S. v. Ocean T. ROSE. CCA 200001187. Writ-appeal petition for review of the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals on application for extraordinary relief filed on December 19, 2000, and placed on the docket this date. Appellee shall file an answer on or before January 2, 2001.

Misc. No. 01-8010/NA. U.S. v. Matthew D. PERRY. CCA 200001397. Writ-appeal petition for review of the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals on application for extraordinary relief filed on December 19, 2000, and placed on the docket this date. Appellee shall file an answer on or before January 2, 2001.

Misc. No. 01-8011/NA. U.S. v. David M. PONDER. CCA 200001320. Writ-appeal petition for review of the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals on application for extraordinary relief filed on December 19, 2000, and placed on the docket this date. Appellee shall file an answer on or before January 2, 2001.

Misc. No. 01-8012/NA. U.S. v. Vitalino A. ARROYO. CCA 200001423. Writ-appeal petition for review of the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals on application for extraordinary relief filed and placed on the docket this date. Appellee shall file an answer on or before January 2, 2001.

No. 01-0116/MC. U.S. v. Daniel A. MCALISTER. CCA 99-1173. Appellant's motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted to January 26, 2001.

No. 01-0164/MC. U.S. v. Christopher B. THOMAS. CCA 99-1723.

No. 01-0165/NA. U.S. v. Bret A. UPCHURCH. CCA 99-1588.

No. 01-0166/MC. U.S. v. Daryl S. MCGONIOLE. CCA 200000307.

No. 01-0167/NA. U.S. v. Michael L. BARTON. CCA 200000669.

No. 00-0324/AF. U.S. v. James W. TAUBMAN. CCA 33742. On
consideration of the granted issue in this case (54 MJ 210) in light of United States v. Lee, No. 99-0002, ___ MJ ___ (2000), the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed.

No. 00-0331/AF. U.S. v. Khalid J. HOBSON. CCA 33847. On
consideration of the granted issue in this case (53 MJ 435) in light of United States v. Lee, No. 99-0002, ___ MJ ___ (2000), the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed.

No. 00-0336/AF. U.S. v. Thomas J. VANKLEEF. CCA 33726. On consideration of the granted issue in this case (54 MJ 236) in light of United States v. Lee, No. 99-0002, ___ MJ ___ (2000), the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed.

No. 00-6002/AF. U.S. v. John T. BALDWIN. CCA 2000-02. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals on appeal by the United States under Article 62, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 USC § 862, said petition is hereby granted and this case shall be called for hearing at 1:30 p.m. on January 9, 2001.

No. 00-0558/AF. U.S. v. Joseph L. GRIJALVA. CCA 33169. Appellant's motion to extend time to file final brief granted to December 20, 2000.

No. 01-0083/AR. U.S. v. James W. LLOYD. CCA 9801781. Appellant's motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted to January 17, 2001.

No. 00-0111/AR. U.S. v. Derrick C. WILLIAMS. CCA 9701161. On further consideration of the granted issues, 53 MJ 124, we note: (1) the Court of Criminal Appeals dismissed one of the two Charges of which appellant was convicted because it was a lesser included offense of the other Charge and determined that an ambiguity in the convening authority’s action required clarification because the action did not expressly approve or disapprove the dishonorable discharge; (2) the Court of Criminal Appeals decided to return the record for corrective action in the form of a rehearing on the sentence or reassessment of sentence on the basis of the remaining affirmed finding; (3) upon remand, reassessment by the convening authority resulted in approval of the same sentence as the sentence that originally had been approved, including express approval of the dishonorable discharge; (4) upon further review, the Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the approved sentence without citing United States v. Sales, 22 MJ 305 (CMA 1986), and United States v. Jones, 39 MJ 315 (CMA 1994); and (5) subsequent to the decision by the Court of Criminal Appeals, we held in United States v. Harris, 53 MJ 86 (2000), that if a Court of Criminal Appeals authorizes sentence reassessment by a convening authority upon remand, the Court of Criminal Appeals must make its own determination as to whether the reassessed sentence comports with Sales and Jones. Under these circumstances, it is appropriate to remand this case to the Court of Criminal Appeals for further consideration in light of Harris. Accordingly, it is ordered that the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals is set aside and that the record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General for remand to that court for further consideration.

No. 01-0160/AR. U.S. v. Shermun L. THOMAS. CCA 9900967.

No. 01-0161/AR. U.S. v. John M. MCCLURG. CCA 9900980.

No. 01-0162/AF. U.S. v. Samuel A. MORSE. CCA 33566.

No. 01-0163/AF. U.S. v. Jeremy S. CARLETTO. CCA 34184.

No. 00-0252/AR. U.S. v. John C. MCALLISTER. CCA 9601134. Appellee's second motion to extend time to file final answer granted to December 21, 2000.

No. 01-0036/CG. U.S. v. Keoni HYLTON. CCA 1130. Appellant's motion to withdraw petition for grant of review granted.

No. 01-0157/AR. U.S. v. Allen E. SIMPSON. CCA 9801824.

No. 01-0158/AR. U.S. v. James GREEN, III. CCA 9900141.

No. 01-0159/MC. U.S. v. Cecil B. BROOM. CCA 200000654.

Misc. No. 01-8006/NA. United States, appellee, v. Michael A. MENDOZA, appellant. CCA 2000-1767. Writ-appeal petition denied.

No. 00-0272/AR. U.S. v. Junior S. PHILLIP. CCA 9700398. Appellant's motion for leave to file second petition for reconsideration denied.

No. 00-0424/AR. U.S. v. Emmet U. ALLEN. CCA 9701466. Appellant's motion to admit additional matters pursuant to United States v. Grostefon denied.

No. 00-0486/CG. U.S. v. Lawrence BROWN. CCA 1105. Appellee's motion to attach affidavit granted to the extent it pertains to the resolution of Issue I raised in the supplement to the petition for grant of review.

No. 00-0694/NA. U.S. v. Patrick J. JACOBSON. CCA 98-0947. On consideration of appellee's motion to attach documents, appellant’s motion to attach documents, and appellee's answer to the supplement to the petition for grant of review which this Court construes as a motion to dismiss petition as untimely, it is ordered that the motions to attach documents are granted and that the motion to dismiss the petition as untimely is denied.

No. 00-0378/AR. U.S. v. Robert C. FOAN. CCA 9900160. On consideration of the above-entitled case, we note that appellant requested waiver of automatic forfeitures. In his response, the staff judge advocate characterized the request as being one for deferment of automatic forfeitures and stated that the judge recommended approval of such deferment. The convening authority (CA) approved the "request for deferment," citing the judge’s recommendation. The action dated 13 APR 1999 reflects the deferment. However, the mischaracterization of appellant’s request and the fact that the judge announced at trial that he was "not stating an opinion as to whether" waiver of automatic forfeitures "is appropriate in this case" (R. 68) raises the question whether the CA misapprehended his authority on this matter. In light of the significant difference between the legal effects of deferment and waiver in this context, we believe the CA should have the opportunity to take the action he deems appropriate based on accurate information. Accordingly, it is ordered that the record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Army for submission to the convening authority or his successor for preparation of a new post-trial recommendation and a new action after consideration of this matter. Thereafter, the record will be returned directly to this Court.

COX, Senior Judge, with whom CRAWFORD, Chief Judge, joins (dissenting): I respectfully dissent. Although appellant has alleged error, he has not alleged nor demonstrated with any specificity that he was actually harmed by the error. Furthermore, no objection was made to the Staff Judge Advocate’s recommendation by counsel presumed to be competent.

No. 01-0151/AR. U.S. v. Jonathan E. MANN. CCA 9801793.

No. 01-0152/AR. U.S. v. Darian L. WALKER. CCA 20000169.

No. 01-0153/AR. U.S. v. Kenneth D. BUCKLER. CCA 9900670.

No. 01-0154/AR. U.S. v. Michael N. CURL. CCA 9901192.

No. 01-0155/AR. U.S. v. Guy H. PARENT. CCA 9900913.

No. 01-0156/AR. U.S. v. Cesar LUNA. CCA 9900203.

No. 00-0424/AR. U.S. v. Emmet U. ALLEN. CCA 9701466. On consideration of appellant's motion to compel production and motion to admit defense appellate exhibits A and B and response to the order of the Court issued on September 15, 2000, it appears that trial defense counsel failed to produce the entire case file when ordered to produce such file by the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals by retaining notes of the hearing pursuant to Article 32(b), Uniform Code of Military Justice, and the trial proceedings. As this withholding is inconsistent with United States v. Dupas, 14 MJ 28 (CMA 1982), it is ordered that said motions are granted and that Mr. J. Frank Burnette, Esquire, shall provide the aforementioned documents to appellate defense counsel.

No. 01-0148/NA. U.S. v. Francis X. TORTORA. CCA 200000446.

No. 01-0149/AF. U.S. v. John N. LEWIS. CCA 34175.

No. 01-0150/AF. U.S. v. Nathaniel K. WILLIAMS, Jr. CCA S29786.

No. 00-0670/AR. U.S. v. Daniel A. PURL. CCA 9701347. Appellant's motion to file supplement to petition for grant of review out of time granted.

No. 00-0693/AF. U.S. v. Jose F.S. SIMOY. CCA 30496. Appellee's motion to file corrected page granted.

No. 01-0022/NA. U.S. v. Brian S. PIRKLE. CCA 99-1327. Appellant's motions to correct errata and to attach granted.

No. 00-0301/MC. U.S. v. Glenn E. HURN. CCA 98-0200.
Appellee's motion to extend time to file answer to final brief granted up to and including January 5, 2001.

No. 99-0770/AF. U.S. v. Mark A. STEVENS. CCA 32733. On consideration of the granted issues in this case (52 MJ 476-77), we hold that, in light of United States v. Rodriguez, 54 MJ 156 (2000), the Court of Criminal Appeals did not err in upholding the military judge’s decision to admit the statements made by appellant to LTCOL Ozimek and MAJ Anderson. We further hold that, with respect to Issue II, the Court of Criminal Appeals did not err in upholding the military judge’s denial of the defense motion to exclude the testimony of the military doctors. See United States v. Bowerman, 39 MJ 219 (CMA 1994). Accordingly, the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed.

GIERKE, Judge (dissenting): I dissent for the reasons set forth in my dissenting opinion in United States v. Rodriguez, 54 MJ 156, 162-63 (2000).

No. 01-0136/AR. U.S. v. Winston A. MCKAY. CCA 9801557.

No. 01-0137/NA. U.S. v. Jake M. MCNAMARA. CCA 200000057.

No. 01-0138/NA. U.S. v. Anne M. JARDINE. CCA 200000330.

No. 01-0139/NA. U.S. v. Leslie M. MUELLER. CCA 99-1797.

No. 01-0140/AF. U.S. v. Ryan A. WOOD. CCA 34071.

No. 01-0141/AF. U.S. v. Shawndalynn L. WILSON. CCA 34059.

No. 01-0142/AF. U.S. v. Carl A. WEBER, IV. CCA 34050.

No. 01-0143/AF. U.S. v. Lisa M. SANTA ANNA. CCA 33967.

No. 01-0144/AF. U.S. v. Michael A. KING. CCA 33362.

No. 01-0145/AF. U.S. v. Justin A. HANDYSIDE. CCA 34043.

No. 01-0146/AF. U.S. v. Kevin G. GLINES. CCA 34104.

No. 01-0147/AF. U.S. v. Joshua L. YETTER. CCA 33422.

No. 94-0796/AR. U.S. v. Stephen E. BOONE, Jr. CCA 9200231. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals on further review, said petition is hereby granted and the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals on further review is affirmed. Appellant’s motion to submit additional matters for consideration and appropriate relief denied. [See also ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW this date.]

Judge SULLIVAN did not participate in these decisions. See United States v. Boone, 48 MJ 380 (1997).

Judge BAKER did not participate in these decisions.

No. 94-0796/AR. U.S. v. Stephen E. BOONE, Jr. CCA 9200231 [See also APPEALS – SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS this date.]

No. 00-0327/NA. U.S. v. Miguel E. INONG. CCA 98-1667. On consideration of the petition for grant of review, we note that appellant has for the first time on appeal raised the question whether he was subjected to illegal pretrial punishment in violation of Article 13, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), 10 USC § 813. It is appropriate for the court below to consider this question initially and to take remedial action if necessary. Accordingly, it is ordered that the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals is set aside. The record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy for remand to that court for consideration of the pretrial punishment issue. Thereafter, Article 67, UCMJ, 10 USC § 867, shall apply.

CRAWFORD, C.J., joined by GIERKE, J. (dissenting):
We dissent. See our separate opinions in United States v. Huffman, 40 MJ 225, 228 (CMA 1994), and United States v. Fricke, 53 MJ 149, 156 (2000).

No. 00-0381/AR. U.S. v. Carl L. BRANCH. CCA 9801790. On consideration of the petition for grant of review, we note that appellant has for the first time on appeal raised the question whether he was subjected to illegal pretrial punishment in violation of Article 13, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), 10 USC § 813. It is appropriate for the court below to consider this question initially and to take remedial action if necessary. Accordingly, it is ordered that the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals is set aside. The record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Army for remand to that court for consideration of the pretrial punishment issue. Thereafter, Article 67, UCMJ, 10 USC § 867, shall apply.

CRAWFORD, C. J., joined by GIERKE, J. (dissenting):
We dissent. See our separate opinions in United States v. Huffman, 40 MJ 225, 228 (CMA 1994), and United States v. Fricke,53 MJ 149, 156 (2000).

No. 00-0574/CG. U.S. v. Darrell R. STIREWALT. CCA 1098.
Appellee's motion to dismiss petition for grant of review granted without prejudice to appellant’s right to file a petition for grant of review on a subsequent date. Appellee’s motion to attach documents granted.

No. 00-0650/AR. U.S. v. Christopher R. TATE. CCA 9501424. On consideration of the response to the order of the Court dated October 24, 2000, to show cause, the petition for grant of review is hereby dismissed.

No. 01-0133/AR. U.S. v. Dennis M. CARR. CCA 20000322.

No. 01-0134/AR. U.S. v. Robert J. WIESEN. CCA 9801770.

No. 01-0135/AR. U.S. v. David W.K. CUNNINGHAM. CCA 9801155.

No. 96-0841/MC. U.S. v. David MAY. CCA 94-2027. Appellant’s petition for reconsideration of this Court’s order issued on September 5, 2000, denied.

No. 00-0301/MC. U.S. v. Glenn E. HURN. CCA 98-0200. Motion filed by the Georgetown University Law Center Appellate Litigation Program seeking permission to appear as Amicus Curiae and to present oral argument granted.

No. 00-0670/AR. U.S. v. Daniel A. PURL. CCA 9701347. Appellant's third motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review denied.

No. 01-0132/AR. U.S. v. Andrea L. LESTER. CCA 9900377.

No. 97-0597/AF. U.S. v. Warren L. DINGES. CCA 32122.

No. 00-0516/AR. U.S. v. Neftali RIVERANIEVES. CCA 9701655.

No. 00-0279/MC. U.S. v. Anthony T. YOUNG. CCA 98-0505.

No. 00-0431/AR. U.S. v. Stanley BARNER. CCA 9701385.

No. 00-0456/AF. U.S. v. Shawn T. BRIDGES. CCA 33369.

No. 00-0499/AR. U.S. v. Guillermo A. QUINTANILLA. CCA 9601465.

No. 00-0346/AR. U.S. v. Eric B. PACHECO. CCA 9500002. Review granted on the following issue raised by appellate defense counsel:

No. 01-0130/AR. U.S. v. Jose L. RODRIGUEZ. CCA 9800800.

No. 01-0131/AR. U.S. v. Teresa J. GRANT. CCA 9801829.

No. 99-0511/AR. U.S. v. Sarveswara R. CHERUKURI. CCA 9601824. Appellant's motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted to January 3, 2001.

No. 00-0456/AF. U.S. v. Shawn T. BRIDGES. CCA 33369. Appellant's motion to file substitute corrected pages granted.

No. 00-0660/AR. U.S. v. Richard C. WEBB. CCA 9800853. Appellant's third motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted to December 18, 2000.

No. 01-0059/AR. U.S. v. John L. PATE. CCA 9801559. Appellant's motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted to January 3, 2001.

No. 01-0061/AR. U.S. v. Dwayne A. LOCKRIDGE. CCA 9801127. Appellant's motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted to January 3, 2001.

No. 01-0128/AF. U.S. v. Jessie L. WRIGHT. CCA 33470.

No. 01-0129/NA. U.S. v. Keith C. TURNER. CCA 00-0288.

No. 01-0122/AF. U.S. v. Martin S. AARON. CCA 33648.

No. 01-0123/AF. U.S. v. Michael A. DIAZ. CCA 33125.

No. 01-0124/AF. U.S. v. Christopher LATIMER. CCA 33194.

No. 01-0125/AF. U.S. v. Timothy L. SMITH. CCA 33910.

No. 01-0126/MC. U.S. v. Joshua S. WENDEL. CCA 200000783.

No. 01-0127/MC. U.S. v. Steven L. DAVIS. CCA 200000510.

No. 99-0838/AF. U.S. v. Shelley S. ROGERS. CCA 32711.