UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 06-100

Tuesday, February 28, 2006

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED

 

No. 06-0260/AR.  U.S. v. David E. SCHMIDT, Jr.  CCA 20031283.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 06-0378/AR.  U.S. v. Anthony J. LYNCH.  CCA 20030602.

No. 06-0379/AR.  U.S. v. Dmitri R. HOLLIS.  CCA 20041086.

No. 06-0380/AR.  U.S. v. Steve A. FOSTER, Jr.  CCA 20050243.

 

MISCELLANEOUS DOCKET - FILINGS

 

Misc. No. 06-8009/NA.  United States, Appellee, v. David A. HERNANDEZ-ALVERADO, Appellant.  CCA 200600037.  Notice is hereby given that a writ-appeal petition for review of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals on application for extraordinary relief was filed under Rule 27(b) on February 9, 2006, and placed on the docket this 28th day of February 2006.

 

Misc. No. 06-8010/NA.  Salvador DIAZ, Petitioner, v. United States, Respondent.  CCA 200200374.  Notice is hereby given that a petition for extraordinary relief in the nature of habeas corpus was filed under Rule 27(a).

 

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

 

No. 06-0297/NA.  U.S. v. Samuel E. TOOTLE.  CCA 9801945.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review out of time granted to March 27, 2006.

 

No. 06-0304/MC.  U.S. v. Angel M. ORELLANA.  CCA 200201634.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted to March 27, 2006.

 

No. 06-0305/NA.  U.S. v. Jeffrey N. CLYDE.  CCA 200500492.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted to March 28, 2006.

 

No. 06-0308/AR.  U.S. v. Jonathan P. WILDER.  CCA 20041295.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted to March 29, 2006.

 

No. 06-5004/AR.  U.S. v. Joshua J. ALEXANDER.  CCA 20031161.  Appellee's motion to extend time to file an answer to Appellant’s brief granted, but only up to and including March 15, 2006; and absent extraordinary circumstances, no further extension of time will be granted in this case.

 



UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 06-099

Monday, February 27, 2006

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED

 

No. 05-0717/MC.  U.S. v. Hunter H. HOLT.  CCA 200202390.

No. 05-0753/AR.  U.S. v. Matthew B. MELLOTT.  CCA 20040337.

No. 06-0081/AR.  U.S. v. Roger MOLLER.  CCA 20041088.

No. 06-0186/AR.  U.S. v. Courtney J. JOHNSON.  CCA 20030550.

No. 06-0256/AR.  U.S. v. Jason M. HILL.  CCA 20050149.

No. 06-0266/AF.  U.S. v. Jerry J. TILLMAN.  CCA S30596.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 06-0375/AR.  U.S. v. John M. NUNEZ.  CCA 20030982.

No. 06-0376/CG.  U.S. v. John R. DENARO.  CCA 1243.

No. 06-0377/AR.  U.S. v. Jace D. SCHNABL.  CCA 20050768.

 

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

 

No. 05-0741/NA.  U.S. v. Trent T. PRITCHETT.  CCA 9601212.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file brief granted, up to and including March 6, 2006; and absent extraordinary circumstances, no further extension of time will be granted in this case.

 

MANDATES ISSUED

 

No. 05-0117/MC.  U.S. v. Brandon T. RIBAUDO.  CCA 200301672.

No. 05-0242/AR.  U.S. v. Sharvenckie R. LONNETTE.  CCA 20020349.

No. 05-0280/AF.  U.S. v. Tracy P. REGAN.  CCA 35419.

No. 05-0381/AF.  U.S. v. Michael D. STEWART.  CCA 35188.

 



UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 06-098

Friday, February 24, 2006

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 06-0367/AF.  U.S. v. Sean M. GRAY.  CCA 35919.

No. 06-0368/AF.  U.S. v. Christopher M. COLGAN.  CCA S30698.

No. 06-0369/AF.  U.S. v. Carl B. MUNFORD.  CCA S30508.

No. 06-0370/AF.  U.S. v. Robert E. O’CONNELL.  CCA S30757.

No. 06-0371/AF.  U.S. v. James J. ROBERTSON.  CCA 36030.

No. 06-0372/AF.  U.S. v. Matthew R. ROWKER.  CCA 36087.

No. 06-0373/AF.  U.S. v. Mark L. STONE.  CCA 36102.

No. 06-0374/NA.  U.S. v. George THOMAS.  CCA 200201613.



 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 06-097

Thursday, February 23, 2006

 

HEARINGS

 

No. 05-0235/NA.  U.S. v. Reginold D. ALLISON.  CCA 200000637.1/

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 06-0366/MC.  U.S. v. Thomas WOLF.  CCA 200400753.

 

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

 

No. 03-0473/NA.  U.S. v. Troy B. JENKINS.  CCA 200101151.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted to March 18, 2006.

 

No. 05-0235/NA.  U.S. v. Reginold D. ALLISON.  CCA 200000637.  On consideration of the motion filed by Florida A & M College of Law for leave to file amicus curiae brief, to participate in oral argument, and for appearance by law student on behalf of amicus curiae, said motion is granted.

 

No. 06-0191/NA.  U.S. v. Timothy L. JONES.  CCA 200501193.  Appellant's second motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted, but only up to and including March 10, 2006; and absent extraordinary circumstances, no further extension of time will be granted in this case.

 

No. 06-0215/MC.  U.S. v. Dexter J. DANIELS.  CCA 200000835.  Appellant's second motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted, but only up to and including March 10, 2006; and absent extraordinary circumstances, no further extension of time will be granted in this case.

 

No. 06-0275/MC.  U.S. v. Cameron D. BOLES.  CCA 200102155.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted to March 17, 2006.

 

No. 06-0278/AR.  U.S. v. Hector M. GARCIA.  CCA 20040416.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted to March 21, 2006.

 

No. 06-0289/NA.  U.S. v. Isreal D. HARVEY.  CCA 200401281. Appellant's motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted to March 21, 2006.

 

No. 06-0290/MC.  U.S. v. Shawn L. TACKETT.  CCA 200300738.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted to March 23, 2006.

 

No. 06-0291/NA.  U.S. v. David D. TATE.  CCA 200201202.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted to March 20, 2006.

 

No. 06-0293/AR.  U.S. v. Julius R. LEWIS-BOSTIC.  CCA 20050015.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted to March 27, 2006.

____________

 

1/  Hearing held at Florida A & M University College of Law, Orlando, Florida, as part of the Court’s “Project Outreach” Program.

 


  

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 06-096

Wednesday, February 22, 2006

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 06-0365/AF.  U.S. v. Ryan M. METZ.  CCA 35915.

 



UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 06-095

Tuesday, February 21, 2006

 

HEARINGS

 

No. 05-5002/MC.  U.S. v. Jennifer N. LONG.  CCA 200201660.1/

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 04-0067/MC.  U.S. v. Timothy T. RYAN.  CCA 9900374.2/

No. 06-0356/AR.  U.S. v. Brandon D. QUICK.  CCA 20041092.

No. 06-0357/AR.  U.S. v. Aaron F. NESBITT.  CCA 20040995.

No. 06-0358/AR.  U.S. v. Antoine D. REESE.  CCA 20040794.

No. 06-0359/AF.  U.S. v. Bernardo L. ACEVEDO.  CCA 35986.

No. 06-0360/AF.  U.S. v. Randy J. DARJEAN.  CCA 35938.

No. 06-0361/AF.  U.S. v. Corey A. GERRICK.  CCA 36128.

No. 06-0362/NA.  U.S. v. Jose L. NEGRON-CRUZ.  CCA 200202247.

No. 06-0363/NA.  U.S. v. Jeffrey C. PTASZKOWSKI.  CCA 200201497.

No. 06-0364/MC.  U.S. v. Steven L. MERRILL.  CCA 200301599.

 

MANDATES ISSUED

 

No. 05-0288/AR.  U.S. v. Erick ALEMAN.  CCA 20030240.

____________

 

1/  Hearing held at Barry University School of Law, Orlando, Florida, as part of the Court’s “Project Outreach” Program.

 

2/  Second petition filed in this case.

 



UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 06-094

Friday, February 17, 2006

 

APPEALS - SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS

 

No. 05-0029/AR.  U.S. v. William E. PITRE III.  CCA 20010258.  On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals, we conclude that the specification of Charge III (simple disorder with a trainee) is a lesser included offense of the specification of Charge I (violation of a lawful general regulation by wrongfully having a relationship with the same trainee).  Under the circumstances, we deem it appropriate to consolidate these specifications.  However, we are satisfied that Appellant was not prejudiced as to sentence.  Accordingly, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the following assigned issue:

 
WHETHER WHAT IS SUBSTANTIALLY ONE TRANSACTION SHOULD NOT BE MADE THE BASIS FOR AN UNREASONABLE MULTIPLICATION OF CHARGES.  THE ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS ERRED BY FAILING TO CONSOLIDATE THE SPECIFICATION OF CHARGE III AND THE SPECIFICATION OF CHARGE I FOR FINDINGS WHERE BOTH OFFENSES ALLEGE THE SAME MISCONDUCT AND BOTH HAVE THE SAME FACTUAL PREDICATE.  THEREFORE, THIS COURT SHOULD CONSOLIDATE THE SPECIFICATIONS AND DISMISS CHARGE III AND ITS SPECIFICATION AND ORDER A SENTENCE REASSESSMENT. 

 

The specification of Charge III and the specification of Charge I are consolidated into the following specification of Charge I:

 
In that Staff Sergeant William E. Pitre III, U.S. Army, did, at
Fort Sill, Oklahoma, on or about 1 August 2000, violate a lawful general regulation, to wit:  para. 4-15a, AR 600-20, dated 15 July 1999, by wrongfully having a relationship not required by the training mission with Private E-1 [CR], an initial training soldier, by wrongfully kissing her, fondling her breasts, and rubbing her legs with the intent to arouse his sexual desires.

The decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed as to the consolidated specification, the remaining Charges and specifications, and the sentence.  [See also ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW this date.]

 

CRAWFORD, Judge (dissenting):  I respectfully dissent because the offenses are not multiplicious and the Court of Criminal Appeals (CCA) did not err by not dismissing one of the specifications as an unreasonable multiplication of charges.

 

     Initially, Appellant pleaded guilty to violation of a lawful general regulation by “wrongfully having a relationship not required by the training mission with [CR], an initial entry training soldier,” maltreatment of a trainee [CR], indecent assault with CR (a lesser-included offense of rape), adultery with CR, and an improper relationship with HR.  Prior to the pleas, Appellant asked that the maltreatment of CR be dismissed as an unreasonable multiplication of charges, in light of the improper relationship charge involving CR.  In this motion, the defense conceded that the charges and specifications were not multiplicious.  App. Ex. VI.

 

During the providence inquiry, the judge advised Appellant of the elements of the offense of violating a lawful general regulation, Army Regulation (AR) 600-20 ¶ 4-15a (15 July 1999), citing only Appellant’s “relationship” with CR as violating the express language of the regulation.  Neither Appellant’s plea to, nor the judge’s description of, this “relationship,” without elaboration, added any further specificity or surplus detail to the specification of Charge I.

 

     We must also consider that while the providence inquiry focused on Appellant’s acts with CR, the stipulation of fact graphically recounted the language Appellant used to CR that clearly was not required by the training mission.  Pros. Ex. 1.  The stipulation mentions this language both in the elements portion and in the narrative.  Further, the stipulation details how Appellant had CR come to his office in the middle of the night, how Appellant had sent the other guard away, and how Appellant then closed the door and approached CR from behind the desk.

 

     When the Army CCA found Appellant not guilty of an indecent assault, but guilty of the lesser-included offense of a disorder, they focused on Appellant’s status as cadre, on CR’s status as an initial entry level trainee, and on Appellant’s acts with CR.  They did not address the relationship, nor did they address the language used by Appellant.  The disorder is based on acts of a traditional nature, not necessarily violative of AR 600-20 and not duplicating other acts and words that could expressly violate the regulation.  Appellant violated Article 92 by ordering a trainee to his office and engaging her in a conversation that established a “relationship not required by the trainee mission.”  Had he stopped there, Appellant would have been guilty only under Article 92; however, he chose to continue with sexual acts, which acts have now been found by the CCA to have comprised only a simple disorder.

 

     Appellant called CR to his office, after having sent the other guard away, approached her from behind his desk for other than a purpose related to the training mission, and then “made inappropriate sexual remarks to [CR] such as asking her whether she ever had sex.”  Pros. Ex. 1, ¶ 8.  Thus, Appellant violated the fraternization regulation by engaging in a relationship not required by the training mission as noted by the judge and as charged by the Government.  Appellant is guilty of the disorder based on his status, CR’s status, Appellant’s touching of CR, and Appellant’s intent.  As such, the disorder does not require a relationship prohibited by AR 600-20 and excludes other aspects of the relationship which were covered by the stipulation of fact and are consistent with the guilty plea inquiry as mentioned above.  When Appellant improperly interacted with CR as a predicate to the sexual acts, he established a prohibited relationship, independent of the sexual acts comprising the disorder.  Thus, there is no multiplicity or unreasonable multiplication of the charges in this case.

 

No. 05-0240/MC.  U.S. v. Rodney N. SIMMONS.  CCA 200300874.  On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals, said petition is granted on the following issue:

 

WHETHER THE COURT BELOW ERRED BY FAILING TO AWARD ANY SENTENCE RELIEF IN APPELLANT'S CASE BASED ON EXCESSIVE AND UNREASONABLE DELAY.

 

     The decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed as to findings, but set aside as to sentence.  The record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy for remand to the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals for further consideration of this issue in light of this Court’s decision in United States v. Jones, 61 M.J. 80 (C.A.A.F. 2005).  Thereafter, Article 67, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 867 (2000), shall apply.  [See also ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW this date.]

 

CRAWFORD, Judge (dissenting):  I dissent for the reasons set forth in my separate opinion in United States v. Jones, 61 M.J. 80, 86 (C.A.A.F. 2005) (Crawford, J., dissenting).

 

ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW

 

No. 05-0029/AR.  U.S. v. William E. PITRE III.  CCA 20010258.  [See also APPEALS – SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS this date.]

 

No. 05-0240/MC.  U.S. v. Rodney N. SIMMONS.  CCA 200300874.  [See also APPEALS – SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS this date.]

 

No. 06-0027/AF.  U.S. v. Michael P. JENKINS.  CCA 35699.  Review granted on the following issue:

 

WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE ABUSED HIS DISCRETION IN ADMITTING APPELLANT'S CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATIONS WITH A PSYCHOLOGIST DURING A COMMANDER-DIRECTED MENTAL HEALTH EVALUATION.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED

 

No. 05-0105/AR.  U.S. v. Steve A. JONES.  CCA 20010229.

No. 06-0087/AR.  U.S. v. Robert S. MARTIN.  CCA 20040758.

No. 06-0154/AF.  U.S. v. Jeremy S. BOZEROCKI.  CCA S30521.

No. 06-0163/MC.  U.S. v. Jervona GORHAM.  CCA 200500740.

No. 06-0166/AR.  U.S. v. Warren D. THOMPSON.  CCA 20041184.

No. 06-0175/AR.  U.S. v. Erasmo M. GARCIA.  CCA 20040437.

No. 06-0270/AF.  U.S. v. Gregory D. LLEWELLYN.  CCA S30773.

 

PETITIONS FOR NEW TRIAL DENIED

 

No. 05-0105/AR.  U.S. v. Steve A. JONES.  CCA 20010229.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 06-0352/AR.  U.S. v. Christopher PATRICK.  CCA 20040842.

No. 06-0353/AF.  U.S. v. Terry L. BOWMAN.  CCA 35597.

No. 06-0354/AF.  U.S. v. Matthew A. COLVIN.  CCA S30639.

No. 06-0355/AF.  U.S. v. Troy A. PRIZER.  CCA 35975.

 


 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 06-093

Thursday, February 16, 2006

 

APPEALS - SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS

 

No. 04-0310/AF.  U.S. v. Michael A. VAN BIBBER.  CCA S30119.  On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals, said petition is granted and the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed.  [See also ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW this date.]

 

No. 05-0635/MC.  U.S. v. Michael R. WILLIAMS.  CCA 200301248.  On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals, said petition is granted and the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed.  [See also ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW this date.]

 

No. 05-0662/NA.  U.S. v. Martin L. EDGEWORTH.  CCA 200400745.  On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals, said petition is granted on the following issue:

 

WHETHER APPELLANT'S PLEAS TO SPECIFICATIONS 1 AND 2 OF THE CHARGE (VIOLATING 18 U.S.C. § 2252A) WERE PROVIDENT IN LIGHT OF THIS COURT'S DECISION IN UNITED STATES v. MARTINELLI, 62 M.J. 52 (C.A.A.F. 2005).

 

     The decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals as to Specifications 1 and 2 of the Charge and the sentence is reversed, but is affirmed in all other respects.  The findings of guilty of Specifications 1 and 2 of the Charge and the sentence are set aside.  The record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy for remand to the Court of Criminal Appeals.  That court may either dismiss Specifications 1 and 2 of the Charge and reassess the sentence based on the affirmed guilty findings or order a rehearing.  [See also ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW this date.]

 

ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW

 

No. 04-0310/AF.  U.S. v. Michael A. VAN BIBBER.  CCA S30119.  [See also APPEALS - SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS this date.]

 

No. 05-0635/MC.  U.S. v. Michael R. WILLIAMS.  CCA 200301248.  [See also APPEALS - SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS this date.]

 

No. 05-0662/NA.  U.S. v. Martin L. EDGEWORTH.  CCA 200400745.  [See also APPEALS - SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS this date.]

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED

 

No. 05-0629/AR.  U.S. v. Albert A. GEORGE.  CCA 20030308.

No. 05-0699/AR.  U.S. v. Terrence D. HAYES.  CCA 20031106.

No. 06-0188/AR.  U.S. v. Johnathan R. FRANKS.  CCA 20050601.

No. 06-0193/AR.  U.S. v. Jonathan W. GOETZCKE.  CCA 20050221.

No. 06-0198/AF.  U.S. v. John A. FREED.  CCA S30746.

No. 06-0217/AF.  U.S. v. Hector SAUSEDA.  CCA 35484.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW – OTHER SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS

 

No. 06-6003/AR.  U.S. v. Josh R. RITTENHOUSE.  CCA 20050411.  On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals on appeal by the United States under Article 62, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 862 (2000), and Appellant’s motion to stay proceedings, said motion is denied; and that said petition is hereby denied without prejudice to raise the issues in a subsequent appeal if Appellant is convicted.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 06-0351/NA.  U.S. v. Harold M. WHITE, JR.  CCA 200301523.

No. 06-6004/CG.  U.S. v. Matthew J. LAYTON.  CCA 001-62-05.

 

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

 

No. 00-0252/AR.  U.S. v. John C. MCALLISTER.  CCA 9601134.  Appellant's motion to exceed page limit is denied.  Appellant will file a pleading that complies with the Court’s rules on or before March 2, 2006.

 

No. 05-0453/MC.  U.S. v. James H. FINCH.  CCA 200000056.  Appellant's motion to attach granted.

 

No. 05-5002/MC.  United States, Appellant and Cross-Appellee, v. Jennifer N. LONG, Appellee and Cross-Appellant.  CCA 200201660.  On consideration of the motion filed by Barry University, Dwayne O. Andreas School of Law, for leave to file amicus curiae brief and participate in oral argument, motion for appearance by law student on behalf of amicus curiae, and motion for oral argument by law student on behalf of amicus granted, said motions are granted.  Amicus curiae will be allotted 10 minutes to present oral argument.

 

No. 06-8006/AR.  Dwight J. LOVING, Petitioner, v. United States.  On consideration of the petition for extraordinary relief in the nature of a writ of habeas corpus, petitioner’s motion to admit counsel pro hac vice, and motion to exceed page limitations, said motions are granted.  Respondent is ordered to show cause on or before March 17, 2006, why the requested relief should not be granted.

 



UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 06-092

Wednesday, February 15, 2006

 

APPEALS - SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS

 

No. 05-0564/NA.  U.S. v. Byron HEARST.  CCA 200201816.  On further consideration of the granted issue, ___ M.J. ___ (Daily Journal October 26, 2005), and in light of United States v. Ribaudo, 62 M.J. 286 (C.A.A.F. 2006), it is ordered that the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED

 

No. 05-0601/MC.  U.S. v. Mark W. MIDLAM.  CCA 200101884.

No. 05-0636/CG.  U.S. v. Heinz D. BRIDGES.  CCA 1147.

No. 05-0708/MC.  U.S. v. Abel M. BARO.  CCA 200200429.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 06-0349/AF.  U.S. v. Eric D. BOGACKI.  CCA S30590.

No. 06-0350/NA.  U.S. v. Antoine M. THOMAS.  CCA 200401690.

 

PETITIONS FOR RECONSIDERATION DENIED

 

No. 05-0117/MC.  United States, Appellee, v. Brandon T. RIBAUDO, Appellant.  CCA 200301672.  Appellant’s petition for reconsideration of this Court’s decision, 62 M.J. 286 (C.A.A.F. 2006), denied.

 

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

 

No. 05-0693/NA.  U.S. v. Bradley D. WYNN.  CCA 200301603.  Appellant's motion to attach granted.

 

No. 05-5003/AF.  U.S. v. Joseph J. HARDING.  CCA 2005-02.  Appellee's motion for expedited consideration is denied.  Oral argument for the above-mentioned case has been scheduled by the Court for March 21, 2006

 

No. 06-0261/AR.  U.S. v. Patrick C. SPIRES.  CCA 20050728.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted to March 15, 2006.

 

No. 06-0262/AR.  U.S. v. Matthew T. DEVAUX.  CCA 20021275.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted to March 15, 2006.

 


 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 06-091

Tuesday, February 14, 2006

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 06-0346/AR.  U.S. v. Tavaran D. RIDLEY.  CCA 20040891.

No. 06-0347/AR.  U.S. v. Shane R. YOUMANS.  CCA 20050248.

No. 06-0348/MC.  U.S. v. Victor M. MENDOZA.  CCA 200101870.

 


 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 06-090

Monday, February 13, 2006

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 06-0337/AR.  U.S. v. Thomas C. LOVETTE.  CCA 20040108.

No. 06-0338/AR.  U.S. v. David A. MORTON.  CCA 20050558.

No. 06-0339/AR.  U.S. v. James B. DIETZ.  CCA 20030323.

No. 06-0340/AR.  U.S. v. Kelvin L. WOMACK.  CCA 20050037.

No. 06-0341/AR.  U.S. v. Michael B. UBER.  CCA 20050168.

No. 06-0342/AR.  U.S. v. Mark J. SLYTER.  CCA 20050269.

No. 06-0343/AR.  U.S. v. Jeffrey M. LENZ.  CCA 20050410.

No. 06-0344/AF.  U.S. v. Zachary F. LORENZ.  CCA 35902.

No. 06-0345/NA.  U.S. v. Jonathan GRADY.  CCA 200501264.

 

MISCELLANEOUS DOCKET - FILINGS

 

Misc. No. 06-8008/NA.  Michael W. PARKER, Petitioner, v. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals, Respondent.  CCA 200201230.  Notice is hereby given that a Petition for extraordinary relief was filed under Rule 27(a) on February 9, 2006, and placed on the docket this date.

 

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

 

No. 05-0634/MC.  U.S. v. Damon G. JOHNSON II.  CCA 200200401.  Appellee's motion to extend time to file an answer to Appellant’s brief is granted up to and including February 27, 2006; and absent extraordinary circumstances, no further extension of time will be granted in this case.

 

No. 06-0177/MC.  U.S. v. Edward M. WERKHEISER.  CCA 200100455.  Appellant's second motion to extend time to file supplement to petition for grant of review granted, but only up to and including February 28, 2006; and absent extraordinary circumstances, no further extension of time will be granted in this case.

 



UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 06-089

Friday, February 10, 2006

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED

 

No. 05-0655/NA.  U.S. v. Peter A. LECO.  CCA 200201653.

No. 06-0144/AR.  U.S. v. Clinton D. VANDENBERG.  CCA 20020991.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 06-0334/AR.  U.S. v. Brandon K. JOHNSON.  CCA 20050625.

No. 06-0335/AF.  U.S. v. John-Paul DOOLIN.  CCA 35825.

No. 06-0336/AF.  U.S. v. Brice M. WILSON.  CCA 35897.

 



UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 06-088

Thursday, February 09, 2006

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED

 

No. 06-0063/AF.  U.S. v. Craig A. TRIVETT.  CCA 36105.

No. 06-0067/MC.  U.S. v. Matthew S. TERRY.  CCA 9701393.

No. 06-0074/AR.  U.S. v. Kenneth C. MADDOX III.  CCA 20041196.

No. 06-0112/AR.  U.S. v. NGUYEN NGUYEN.  CCA 20050347.

No. 06-0209/AF.  U.S. v. Lucas S. TRUSTY.  CCA S30777.

No. 06-0255/AR.  U.S. v. Michael L. LANGLEY.  CCA 20040194.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW - OTHER SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS

 

No. 06-0131/AR.  U.S. v. Kendrill D. BUTLER.  CCA 20031235.  [See INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS this date].

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 06-0332/AR.  U.S. v. Maurice E. SHUMPERT II.  CCA 20040746.

No. 06-0333/AR.  U.S. v. Henry R. MARIN.  CCA 20030276.

 

MISCELLANEOUS DOCKET - SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS

 

Misc. No. 06-8007/NA.  U.S., Respondent v. Darryl S. PHILLIPS, Petitioner.  CCA 200400865.  Notice is hereby given that a petition for extraordinary relief in the nature of a writ of habeas corpus was filed under Rule 27(a) and placed on the docket on this date.  On consideration thereof, said petition is hereby denied without prejudice.

 

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

 

No. 03-0647/AR.  U.S. v. Ray T. LEAK.  CCA 20000356.  Appellee's motion to stay proceedings granted.  The proceedings before this Court are hereby stayed until further order of the Court.  Counsel for the Appellee is directed to notify the Court of the completion of the proceedings before the court below.

 

No. 05-0655/NA.  U.S. v. Peter A. LECO.  CCA 200201653.  On consideration of Appellant’s motions to attach and Appellee’s motion to dismiss the petition for grant of review, Appellant’s motions to attach are granted; Appellee’s motion dismiss the petition for grant of review is denied.  

 

No. 05-0753/AR.  U.S. v. Matthew B. MELLOTT.  CCA 20040337.  Appellant's motion to submit additional matters pursuant to United States v. Grostefon, 12 M.J. 431 (C.M.A. 1982), granted.

 

No. 06-0131/AR.  U.S. v. Kendrill D. BUTLER.  CCA 20031235.  Appellant's motion to withdraw from appellate review granted.  [See PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW - OTHER SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS this date.]

 

No. 06-0144/AR.  U.S. v. Clinton D. VANDENBERG.  CCA 20020991.  Appellee's motion to file answer to the supplement to the petition for grant of review out of time granted.

 

No. 06-0245/AR.  U.S. v. Eddie R. HOBSON.  CCA 20020904.  Appellant's motion to file an extension to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review out of time granted to March 8, 2006.

 

No. 06-0250/AR.  U.S. v. Jacob L. TERRY.  CCA 20050163.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to March 10, 2006.

 

No. 06-0251/AR.  U.S. v. Ryan A. ROKEY.  CCA 20021247.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to March 10, 2006.

 

No. 06-0315/AF.  U.S. v. Rufus D. SHUMATE.  CCA S30813.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to April 5, 2006.

 

No. 06-6003/AR.  U.S. v. Josh R. RITTENHOUSE.  CCA 20050411.  Appellee's motion to file an answer to the supplement to the petition for grant of review out of time granted.

 



UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 06-087

Wednesday, February 08, 2006

 

HEARINGS

 

No. 06-5001/AR.  U.S. v. Samuel D. ZACHARY.  CCA 20020984.

No. 06-5002/CG.  U.S. v. Jeffrey M. MILLER.  CCA 005-69-01.

No. 06-6001/NA.  U.S. v. Charles W. DAVIS.  CCA 9600585.

 

APPEALS - SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS

 

No. 05-0160/AR.  U.S. v. Michael B. PEARSON.  CCA 20040524.  On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals, the petition is granted and the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed.  [See ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW this date].

 

ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW

 

No. 05-0160/AR.  U.S. v. Michael B. PEARSON.  CCA 20040524.  [See APPEALS – SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS this date].

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 06-0324/AR.  U.S. v. Connelly R. HUNTER.  CCA 20050748.

No. 06-0325/AR.  U.S. v. Joshua J. PARISI.  CCA 20020970.

No. 06-0326/MC.  U.S. v. Shawn A. JONES.  CCA 200501339.

No. 06-0327/AF.  U.S. v. Ian J. GROSHONG.  CCA 35675.

No. 06-0328/AF.  U.S. v. Michael D. HILLIARD.  CCA 35516.

No. 06-0329/AF.  U.S. v. Tyrance D. PHILLIPS.  CCA 36022.

No. 06-0330/AF.  U.S. v. Kirk QUADRENY.  CCA S30741.

No. 06-0331/AR.  U.S. v. Tae E. KIM.  CCA 20040894.

 



UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 06-086

Tuesday, February 07, 2006

 

HEARINGS

 

No. 03-0072/AF.  U.S. v. Joshua P. LOVETT.  CCA 33947.

No. 05-0157/NA.  U.S. v. Ivor G. LUKE.  CCA 200000481.

No. 05-0420/MC.  U.S. v. Michael J. ADAMS.  CCA 200200722.

No. 05-0545/AF.  U.S. v. Kirk A. MOSS.  CCA 35379.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED

 

No. 05-0656/AF.  U.S. v. Jason S. BONNER.  CCA 35618.

No. 05-0731/AR.  U.S. v. Annette R. EDWARDS.  CCA 20041020.

No. 06-0022/AR.  U.S. v. Pete A. SMITH.  CCA 20020859.

No. 06-0031/AR.  U.S. v. Curba R. MERRILL, Jr.  CCA 20041093.

No. 06-0033/AR.  U.S. v. Jarrette C. DEWS.  CCA 20041228.

No. 06-0055/AF.  U.S. v. Shelley R. KOLAR.  CCA 35540.

No. 06-0107/AF.  U.S. v. Andrea T. DRAUGHN.  CCA S30382.

No. 06-0142/AR.  U.S. v. Alvaro GUERRA.  CCA 20050177.

No. 06-0156/AF.  U.S. v. Louis J. MALLORY III.  CCA S30784.

No. 06-0169/AR.  U.S. v. Michael R. SMITH, Jr.  CCA 20020531.

No. 06-0184/NA.  U.S. v. Johnathan D. GRAHAM.  CCA 200500885.

No. 06-0192/AR.  U.S. v. Daniel VILLARREAL.  CCA 20001108.

No. 06-0200/AR.  U.S. v. Jasmine R. LEWIS.  CCA 20030927.

No. 06-0218/MC.  U.S. v. Marc A. MONROY.  CCA 200500956.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 06-0322/AR.  U.S. v. Eric R. HAMMOND.  CCA 20020408.

No. 06-0323/AR.  U.S. v. Mario V. RODRIGUEZ.  CCA 20030751.

 

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

 

No. 03-0538/MC.  U.S. v. Nathan T. OTTO.  CCA 200001460.

Appellant's motion for leave to file supplement to the petition for grant of review out of time granted.

 

MANDATES ISSUED

 

No. 05-0403/AF.  U.S. v. John B. CARY  Jr.  CCA S30146.



 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 06-085

Monday, February 06, 2006

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 06-0317/AR.  U.S. v. Robert OLIVARES, Jr.  CCA 20040225.

No. 06-0318/AR.  U.S. v. Anthony J. WIRMUSKY III.  CCA 20041264.

No. 06-0319/MC.  U.S. v. Jason L. TAYLOR.  CCA 200202366.

No. 06-0320/MC.  U.S. v. Michael A. JONES.  CCA 200100889.

No. 06-0321/MC.  U.S. v. Timothy G. GILMORE.  CCA 200401106.

 

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

 

No. 04-0295/AR.  U.S. v. Eric MCNUTT.  CCA 20020022.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to March 8, 2006.

 

No. 06-0170/AR.  U.S. v. Christopher L. ARGUELLEZ.  CCA 20030850. Appellant's second motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted, but only up to and including February 22, 2006; and absent extraordinary circumstances, no further extension of time will be granted in this case.

 

No. 06-0246/AR. U.S. v. Paul A. MCCATHRON.  CCA 20021424.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to March 8, 2006.

 



UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 06-084

Friday, February 03, 2006

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 06-0314/AF.  U.S. v. Keith M. TERRY.  CCA 35801.

No. 06-0315/AF.  U.S. v. Rufus D. SHUMATE.  CCA S30813.

No. 06-0316/AR.  U.S. v. David J. AGUILAR.  CCA 20050491.

 

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

 

No. 06-0236/AR.  U.S., Appellee v. Joshua S. FELICE, Appellant.  CCA 20050422.  Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to March 6, 2006.

 

MANDATES ISSUED

 

No. 04-0470/AR.  U.S. v. James H. HILL.  CCA 20000208. 



 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 06-083

Thursday, February 02, 2006

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 06-0313/AR.  U.S. v. Rashard C. JACKSON.  CCA 20010355.

 

MISCELLANEOUS DOCKET - FILINGS

 

Misc. No. 06-8006/AR.  U.S., Respondent v. Dwight J. LOVING, Petitioner.  Petition for extraordinary relief in the nature of a writ of habeas corpus filed under Rule 27(a).

 



UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

No. 06-082

Wednesday, February 01, 2006

 

ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW

 

No. 03-0086/AR.  U.S. v. Stanley E. EDMOND.  CCA 9900904.  Review granted on the following issues:

 

I.  WHETHER THE ARMY COURT ERRED WHEN IT CONCLUDED THAT THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTORIAL INTERFERENCE IN APPELLANT'S CASE, AND AS A RESULT, APPELLANT WAS DEPRIVED OF HIS FIFTH AMENDMENT RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS AND SIXTH AMENDMENT RIGHT TO COMPULSORY PROCESS.

 

II. WHETHER APPELLANT'S TRIAL DEFENSE COUNSEL WAS INEFFECTIVE WHEN HE FAILED TO PERSONALLY INQUIRE WHY A MATERIAL DEFENSE WITNESS REFUSED TO TESTIFY AFTER THE WITNESS SPOKE WITH THE PROSECUTOR, AND AFTER TRIAL DEFENSE COUNSEL WAS INFORMED THAT THE SAME WITNESS HAD ALLEGEDLY INVOKED HIS FIFTH AMENDMENT RIGHT AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION.

 

Briefs will be filed under Rule 25.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED

 

No. 05-0698/MC.  U.S. v. Roy R. MCNAMARA.  CCA 200200217.

No. 05-0726/AF.  U.S. v. Katia D. SALINAS.  CCA S30637.

No. 05-0737/AF.  U.S. v. Patrick E. TEATS.  CCA S30667.

No. 05-0762/AR.  U.S. v. Mark K. SCHENCK.  CCA 20041237.

No. 06-0037/AR.  U.S. v. Bryan J. THOMAS.  CCA 20021374.

No. 06-0049/AR.  U.S. v. Singnhoth A. BOUNMY.  CCA 20021303.

No. 06-0088/AR.  U.S. v. Jermaine E. McGEE.  CCA 20030660.

No. 06-0101/AR.  U.S. v. John C. TRUJILLO.  CCA 20040062.

No. 06-0140/AF.  U.S. v. Michael F. GATES.  CCA 35841.

No. 06-0149/AR.  U.S. v. Eric M. WINDING.  CCA 20040838.

No. 06-0189/AR.  U.S. v. Christopher J. BROWN.  CCA 20050600.

No. 06-0221/AR.  U.S. v. Konah C. PARKER.  CCA 20021252.

 

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

 

No. 06-0312/NA.  U.S. v. Eduardo V. OCHOA.  CCA 200501077.

 


Home Page |  Opinions & Digest  |  Daily Journal  |  Scheduled Hearings  |  Search Site