UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Wednesday, June 30, 2021

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 21-0303/AF. U.S. v. Cody W. Stefanek. CCA 39895.

No. 21-0304/MC. U.S. v. Christopher J. Nelson. CCA 202000108.

 

Interlocutory Orders

 

No. 20-0345/AR. U.S. v. Jacob L. Brubaker-Escobar. CCA 20190618. On consideration of the motion filed by Major Alexander N. Hess for leave to withdraw as appellate defense counsel, it appears that the Judge Advocate General has assigned another counsel to represent appellant and that the new attorney has assumed the representation of said appellant. Accordingly, it is ordered that the motion is granted.

 

No. 21-0149/NA. United States, Appellee/Cross-Appellant v. Paul E. Cooper, Appellant/Cross-Appellee. CCA 201500039. Appellant/Cross-Appellee's motion to extend time to file a brief is granted to July 29, 2021.

 

No. 21-0155/AR. U.S. v. Omar A. Hernandez. CCA 20160217. On consideration of the motion filed by Major Alexander N. Hess for leave to withdraw as appellate defense counsel, it appears that the Judge Advocate General has assigned another counsel to represent appellant and that the new attorney has assumed the representation of said appellant. Accordingly, it is ordered that the motion is granted.

 

No. 21-0283/AR. U.S. v. Jermy E. Hardin. CCA 20200151. On consideration of the motion filed by Major Alexander N. Hess for leave to withdraw as appellate defense counsel, it appears that the Judge Advocate General has assigned another counsel to represent appellant and that the new attorney has assumed the representation of said appellant. Accordingly, it is ordered that the motion is granted.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Tuesday, June 29, 2021

 

Petition for Grant of Review - Summary Disposition

 

No. 21-0258/AR. U.S. v. James L. Dongarra III. CCA 20200633. On consideration of Appellant's petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is granted, and the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed.*

 

* It is directed that the Judgment of the Court and Convening Authority Action be corrected by changing the statement "The automatic forfeiture of all pay and allowances per month to be waived for a period of six months, to be paid to the accused's spouse, Mrs. A.D." to "The automatic forfeiture of two-thirds pay per month to be waived for a period of six months, to be paid to the accused's spouse, Mrs. A.D."

 

Appeals Summary Dispositions

 

No. 20-0358/AR. U.S. v. Carlos Muniz, Jr. CCA 20200092. On further consideration of the granted issue (80 M.J. 401 (C.A.A.F. 2020)), and because the charges were not preferred in this case until after January 1, 2019, we conclude that the convening authority did not err in taking "no action" on the sentence, and the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals had jurisdiction to review Appellant's case. See United States v. Brubaker-Escobar, 81 M.J. __ (C.A.A.F. June 4, 2021). Accordingly, it is ordered that the judgment of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed.

 

No. 21-0062/AR. U.S. v. Fernando Quinones-Colon, Jr. CCA 20200093. On further consideration of the granted issue (80 M.J. 466 (C.A.A.F. 2020)), and because the charges were not preferred in this case until after January 1, 2019, we conclude that the convening authority did not err in taking "no action" on the sentence, and the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals had jurisdiction to review Appellant's case. See United States v. Brubaker-Escobar, 81 M.J. __ (C.A.A.F. June 4, 2021). Accordingly, it is ordered that the judgment of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed.

 

No. 21-0066/AR. U.S. v. Alan D. Ross. CCA 20190537. On further consideration of the granted issue (81 M.J. 66 (C.A.A.F. 2021)), and because the charges were not preferred in this case until after January 1, 2019, we conclude that the convening authority did not err in taking "no action" on the sentence, and the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals had jurisdiction to review Appellant's case. See United States v. Brubaker-Escobar, 81 M.J. __ (C.A.A.F. June 4, 2021). Accordingly, it is ordered that the judgment of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed.

 

No. 21-0078/AR. U.S. v. Montana J. Miller. CCA 20190597. On further consideration of the granted issue (81 M.J. 50 (C.A.A.F. 2021)), and because the charges were not preferred in this case until after January 1, 2019, we conclude that the convening authority did not err in taking "no action" on the sentence, and the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals had jurisdiction to review Appellant's case. See United States v. Brubaker-Escobar, 81 M.J. __ (C.A.A.F. June 4, 2021). Accordingly, it is ordered that the judgment of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed.

 

No. 21-0134/AR. U.S. v. Luis E. Ramirez. CCA 20190367. On further consideration of the granted issue (81 M.J. __ (C.A.A.F. Apr. 23, 2021)), and because the charges were not preferred in this case until after January 1, 2019, we conclude that the convening authority did not err in taking "no action" on the sentence, and the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals had jurisdiction to review Appellant's case. See United States v. Brubaker-Escobar, 81 M.J. __ (C.A.A.F. June 4, 2021). Accordingly, it is ordered that the judgment of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed.

 

No. 21-0140/AR. U.S. v. Jonathan D. Davenport. CCA 20200190. On further consideration of the granted issue (81 M.J. __ (C.A.A.F. Mar. 15, 2021)), and because the charges were not preferred in this case until after January 1, 2019, we conclude that the convening authority did not err in taking "no action" on the sentence, and the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals had jurisdiction to review Appellant's case. See United States v. Brubaker-Escobar, 81 M.J. __ (C.A.A.F. June 4, 2021). Accordingly, it is ordered that the judgment of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed.

 

No. 21-0184/AR. U.S. v. Joseph P. Popp. CCA 20190333. On further consideration of the granted issue (81 M.J. __ (C.A.A.F. Apr. 7, 2021)), and because the charges were not preferred in this case until after January 1, 2019, we conclude that the convening authority did not err in taking "no action" on the sentence, and the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals had jurisdiction to review Appellant's case. See United States v. Brubaker-Escobar, 81 M.J. __ (C.A.A.F. June 4, 2021). Accordingly, it is ordered that the judgment of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed.

 

No. 21-0201/AR. U.S. v. Adrian L. Ingram, Jr. CCA 20190610. On further consideration of the granted issue (81 M.J. __ (C.A.A.F. May 4, 2021)), and because the charges were not preferred in this case until after January 1, 2019, we conclude that the convening authority did not err in taking "no action" on the sentence, and the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals had jurisdiction to review Appellant's case. See United States v. Brubaker-Escobar, 81 M.J. __ (C.A.A.F. June 4, 2021). Accordingly, it is ordered that the judgment of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed.

 

Interlocutory Orders

 

No. 21-0066/AR. U.S. v. Alan D. Ross. CCA 20190537. On consideration of the motion filed by Major Kyle C. Sprague for leave to withdraw as appellate defense counsel, it appears that the Judge Advocate General has assigned another counsel to represent appellant and that the new attorney has assumed the representation of said appellant. Accordingly, it is ordered that the motion is granted.

 

No. 21-0078/AR. U.S. v. Montana J. Miller. CCA 20190597. On consideration of the motion filed by Major Alexander N. Hess for leave to withdraw as appellate defense counsel, it appears that the Judge Advocate General has assigned another counsel to represent appellant and that the new attorney has assumed the representation of said appellant. Accordingly, it is ordered that the motion is granted.

 

No. 21-0085/AR. U.S. v. John T. Long. CCA 20150160. On consideration of the motion filed by Major Alexander N. Hess for leave to withdraw as appellate defense counsel, it appears that the Judge Advocate General has assigned another counsel to represent appellant and that the new attorney has assumed the representation of said appellant. Accordingly, it is ordered that the motion is granted.

 

No. 21-0089/MC. U.S. v. Jonathan Quezada. CCA 201900115. Appellant's motion to extend time to file a reply brief is granted to July 13, 2021.

 

No. 21-0184/AR. U.S. v. Joseph P. Popp. CCA 20190333. On consideration of the motion filed by Major Kyle C. Sprague for leave to withdraw as appellate defense counsel, it appears that the Judge Advocate General has assigned another counsel to represent appellant and that the new attorney has assumed the representation of said appellant. Accordingly, it is ordered that the motion is granted.

 

No. 21-0263/AR. U.S. v. Angel I. Spencer. CCA 20190762. Appellant's motion to extend time to file a supplemental issue is granted to July 7, 2021.

 

No. 21-0275/AR. U.S. v. Michael D. Johnson. CCA 20190386. On consideration of the motion filed by Major Alexander N. Hess for leave to withdraw as appellate defense counsel, it appears that the Judge Advocate General has assigned another counsel to represent appellant and that the new attorney has assumed the representation of said appellant. Accordingly, it is ordered that the motion is granted.

 

No. 21-0299/MC. U.S. v. Yusif M. McCall. CCA 201900225. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review is granted to July 19, 2021.

 

No. 21-0302/AR. U.S. v. Keenan R. Ducksworth. CCA 201900183. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review is granted to July 19, 2021.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Monday, June 28, 2021

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 21-0301/AR. U.S. v. Brian K. Hollenbeck. CCA 20170237.

No. 21-0302/AR. U.S. v. Keenan R. Ducksworth. CCA 20190183.

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Denied

 

No. 21-0265/AR. U.S. v. Taylor R. McGough. CCA 20200637.

No. 21-0266/AF. U.S. v. Dylan A. Samudio. CCA S32620.

 

Interlocutory Orders

 

No. 20-0366/AR. U.S. v. Thomas M. Adams. CCA 20130693. On consideration of the motion filed by Major Alexander N. Hess for leave to withdraw as appellate defense counsel, it is ordered that the motion is granted.

 

No. 21-0042/AR. U.S. v. Danny L. McPherson. CCA 20180214. On consideration of the motion filed by Major Alexander N. Hess for leave to withdraw as appellate defense counsel, it appears that the Judge Advocate General has assigned another counsel to represent appellant and that the new attorney has assumed the representation of said appellant. Accordingly, it is ordered that the motion is granted.

 

No. 21-0219/AR. U.S. v. Conner B. Hiser. CCA 20190325. On consideration of the motion filed by Major Alexander N. Hess for leave to withdraw as appellate defense counsel, it is ordered that the motion is granted.

 

No. 21-0235/AR. U.S. v. David C. Tate. CCA 20180477. On consideration of the motion filed by Major Alexander N. Hess for leave to withdraw as appellate defense counsel, it appears that the Judge Advocate General has assigned another counsel to represent appellant and that the new attorney has assumed the representation of said appellant. Accordingly, it is ordered that the motion is granted.

 

No. 21-0263/AR. U.S. v. Angel I. Spencer. CCA 20190762. On consideration of the motion filed by Major Alexander N. Hess for leave to withdraw as appellate defense counsel, it appears that the Judge Advocate General has assigned another counsel to represent appellant and that the new attorney has assumed the representation of said appellant. Accordingly, it is ordered that the motion is granted.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Friday, June 25, 2021

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 21-0298/AR. U.S. v. Justin L. Obbink. CCA 20200433.

No. 21-0299/MC. U.S. v. Yusif M. McCall. CCA 201900225.

No. 21-0300/NA. U.S. v. Anthony J. Fryer. CCA 201900324.

 

Order Granting Petition for Review

 

No. 21-0243/AF. U.S. v. Derrick O. Williams. CCA 39746. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is granted on the following issue:

 

WHETHER THE AIR FORCE COURT ERRED BY FAILING TO CONSIDER APPELLANT'S ERRONEOUS DEPRIVATION OF PAY WHILE SERVING HARD LABOR WITHOUT CONFINEMENT, PROPERLY RAISED AS AN EIGHTH AMENDMENT VIOLATION, WHEN ASSESSING SENTENCE APPROPRIATENESS.

 

No briefs will be filed under Rule 25.

 

Interlocutory Order

 

No. 21-0297/AF. U.S. v. Kristofer J. Cruspero. CCA S32595. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review is granted to July 15, 2021.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Thursday, June 24, 2021

 

Petition for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 21-0297/AF. U.S. v. Kristofer J. Cruspero. CCA S32595.

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Denied

 

No. 21-0209/AF. U.S. v. Michael P. Baird. CCA 39768.

No. 21-0259/AR. U.S. v. Courage Kamara, Jr. CCA 20200322.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Wednesday, June 23, 2021

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Denied

 

No. 21-0220/AR. U.S. v. Kevin L. Smith. CCA 20190832.

No. 21-0233/AR. U.S. v. Irvin Paredes-Martinez. CCA 20190224.

 

Interlocutory Orders

 

No. 21-0230/AR. U.S. v. Jason M. Sartori. CCA 20190052. Appellant's motion for leave to file a supplement to the petition for grant of review exceeding the page and word limit is denied. Appellant will file a supplement to the petition for grant of review that complies with Rule 24 on or before June 30, 2021.

 

No. 21-0267/AR. U.S. v. Mark W. Christensen. CCA 20190197. On consideration of the motion filed by Major Kyle Sprague for leave to withdraw as appellate defense counsel, it is ordered that the motion is granted.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Tuesday, June 22, 2021

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Denied

 

No. 21-0109/AR. U.S. v. Sergio A. Reyes-Lesmes. CCA 20180396.

No. 21-0197/AF. U.S. v. Anthony R. Lizana. CCA 39280.

No. 21-0199/AF. U.S. v. Xavier L. Rice. CCA 39071.

No. 21-0215/AR. U.S. v. Julian D. Wiggins. CCA 20190289.

No. 21-0217/AF. U.S. v. Sean M. Miller. CCA 39747.

No. 21-0218/MC. U.S. v. Noah F. Martin-Moore. CCA 201900250.

No. 21-0238/AF. U.S. v. Michael F. Bonior. CCA 39755.

No. 21-0253/AR. U.S. v. Nathen R. Elliott-Brown. CCA 20200332.

 

Miscellaneous Docket - Filing

 

No. 21-0296/AR. In re Erik D. Jenkins. Notice is given that a petition for extraordinary relief in the nature of writ of mandamus was filed under Rule 27(a) on this date.

 

Interlocutory Orders

 

No. 21-0040/AR. U.S. v. Leshan Jones. CCA 20190254. On consideration of the motion filed by Captain Brianna C. Tuohy for leave to withdraw as appellate defense counsel, it appears that the Judge Advocate General has assigned another counsel to represent appellant and that the new attorney has assumed the representation of said appellant. Accordingly, it is ordered that the motion is granted.

 

No. 21-0069/AF. U.S. v. Jerard Simmons. CCA 39342. Appellee's motion to file a supplemental joint appendix is granted.

 

No. 21-0179/AR. U.S. v. Xavier L. Anderson. CCA 20180447. On consideration of the motion filed by Captain Brianna C. Tuohy for leave to withdraw as appellate defense counsel, it appears that the Judge Advocate General has assigned another counsel to represent appellant and that the new attorney has assumed the representation of said appellant. Accordingly, it is ordered that the motion is granted.

 

No. 21-0220/AR. U.S. v. Kevin L. Smith. CCA 20190832. On consideration of the motion filed by Captain Brianna C. Tuohy for leave to withdraw as appellate defense counsel, it appears that the Judge Advocate General has assigned another counsel to represent appellant and that the new attorney has assumed the representation of said appellant. Accordingly, it is ordered that the motion is granted.

 

No. 21-0233/AR. U.S. v. Irvin Paredes-Martinez. CCA 20190224. On consideration of Appellant's motion for leave to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review exceeding the page and word limits, because the supplement does not exceed the lines of text limitation of C.A.A.F. R. 21(b) and is otherwise acceptable, it is ordered that the motion is denied as moot.

 

No. 21-0234/AR. U.S. v. Logan T. Kyle. CCA 20190372. On consideration of the motion filed by Captain Brianna C. Tuohy for leave to withdraw as appellate defense counsel, it appears that the Judge Advocate General has assigned another counsel to represent appellant and that the new attorney has assumed the representation of said appellant. Accordingly, it is ordered that the motion is granted.

 

No. 21-0292/MC. U.S. v. Mason R. Terwilliger. CCA 201900292. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review is granted to July 12, 2021.

 

No. 21-0293/NA. U.S. v. Michael T. Lamore. CCA 201900315. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review is granted to July 12, 2021.

 

Mandates Issued

 

No. 20-0340/AF. U.S. v. Eric R. Proctor. CCA S32554.

No. 20-0345/AR. U.S. v. Jacob L. Brubaker-Escobar. CCA 20190618.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Monday, June 21, 2021

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 21-0293/NA. U.S. v. Michael T. Lamore. CCA 201900315.

No. 21-0294/AR. U.S. v. Jesse E. Spyker. CCA 20200483.

No. 21-0295/AR. U.S. v. Joshua R. Pruett. CCA 20180368.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Thursday, June 17, 2021

 

Petition for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 21-0292/MC. U.S. v. Mason R. Terwilliger. CCA 201900292.

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Denied

 

No. 21-0194/NA. U.S. v. Jayson W. Grant. CCA 201900212.

No. 21-0228/AR. U.S. v. Abdul M. Shuford. CCA 20190594.

No. 21-0231/AF. U.S. v. Jonathan D. Painter. CCA 39646.

No. 21-0239/AR. U.S. v. Juan R. Coloncordero. CCA 20190303.

No. 21-0248/AR. U.S. v. Frank K. Hertel II. CCA 20200348.

 

Miscellaneous Docket - Filing

 

No. 21-0287/AF. Ralph J. Hyppolite II, Appellant v. United States, Appellee. CCA 2021-02. Notice is given that a writ-appeal petition for review of the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals on application for extraordinary relief in the nature of a writ of habeas corpus was filed under Rule 27(b) on June 15, 2021, and placed on the docket on this date.

 

Interlocutory Orders

 

No. 21-0059/MC. U.S. v. Bradley M. Metz. CCA 201900089. Appellant's second motion to extend time to file a reply brief is granted to June 24, 2021.

 

No. 21-0109/AR. U.S. v. Sergio A. Reyes-Lesmes. CCA 20180396. On consideration of Appellant's motion to file an additional matter pursuant to United States v. Grostefon, 12 M.J. 431 (C.M.A. 1982), out of time, it is ordered that the motion is denied.

 

No. 21-0272/MC. U.S. v. Barnabas E. Pearson. CCA 201900314. Appellant's second motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review is granted to July 6, 2021.

 

No. 21-0283/AR. U.S. v. Jermy E. Hardin. CCA 20200151. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review is granted to July 7, 2021.

 

No. 21-0284/AF. U.S. v. Ryne M. Seeto. CCA 39247. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review is granted to July 7, 2021.

 

No. 21-0285/AF. U.S. v. Travis S. Beck, Jr. CCA 39793. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review is granted to July 7, 2021.

 

No. 21-0288/NA. U.S. v. Michael B. Powell. CCA 201900280. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review is granted to July 7, 2021.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Wednesday, June 16, 2021

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 21-0289/AR. U.S. v. Vanessa L. Lancaster. CCA 20190852.

No. 21-0290/AR. U.S. v. Albert N. Yeboah. CCA 20200529.

No. 21-0291/AR. U.S. v. Luis L. Ballesteros. CCA 20200319.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Tuesday, June 15, 2021

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 21-0286/AF. U.S. v. Armis J. Sunday. CCA 39760.

No. 21-0288/NA. U.S. v. Michael B. Powell. CCA 201900280.

 

Mandate Issued

 

No. 21-0025/AF. U.S. v. Matthew C. Harrington. CCA 2020-02.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Monday, June 14, 2021

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 21-0283/AR. U.S. v. Jermy E. Hardin. CCA 20200151.

No. 21-0284/AF. U.S. v. Ryne M. Seeto. CCA 39247.

No. 21-0285/AF. U.S. v. Travis S. Beck, Jr. CCA 39793.

 

Interlocutory Orders

 

No. 21-0279/AR. U.S. v. Nigua J. Mack. CCA 20200331. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review is granted to July 6, 2021.

 

No. 21-0280/AR. U.S. v. Mark J. Meneses. CCA 20190636. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review is granted to July 6, 2021.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Friday, June 11, 2021

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 21-0280/AR. U.S. v. Mark J. Meneses. CCA 20190636.

No. 21-0281/AF. U.S. v. Michael J. Lewis. CCA S32614.

No. 21-0282/AR. U.S. v. Lavon C. Blaylock. CCA 20200395.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Thursday, June 10, 2021

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 21-0277/AR. U.S. v. Jose G. Ramos. CCA 20200291.

No. 21-0278/AR. U.S. v. Christopher P. Morris. CCA 20200066.

No. 21-0279/AR. U.S. v. Nigua J. Mack. CCA 20200331.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Wednesday, June 9, 2021

 

Petition for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 21-0276/AR. U.S. v. Romon L. Hammond. CCA 20200168.

 

Interlocutory Order

 

No. 21-0218/MC. U.S. v. Noah F. Martin-Moore. CCA 201900250. Appellant's motion to supplement the record is denied.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Tuesday, June 8, 2021

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Denied

 

No. 21-0175/AR. U.S. v. Michael A. Robinson. CCA 20190231.

No. 21-0213/AR. U.S. v. Carlos J. Valentin. CCA 20190075.

No. 21-0224/AR. U.S. v. Hashim M. Miller. CCA 20200170.

No. 21-0229/AR. U.S. v. Randy D. White. CCA 20190194.

No. 21-0237/AR. U.S. v. Phillip D. Pennington. CCA 20190605.

No. 21-0240/AR. U.S. v. Matthew J. Lewandowski. CCA 20190714.

No. 21-0241/AR. U.S. v. Glenn S. Smith, Jr. CCA 20200229.

No. 21-0242/AR. U.S. v. Demetrius J. Slaughter. CCA 20200110.

 

Petition for Grant of Review - Summary Disposition

 

No. 21-0246/AR. U.S. v. Stephen S. Lee. CCA 20180001. Appellee's motion to dismiss the petition for grant of review for lack of jurisdiction is granted.

 

Order Granting Petition for Review

 

No. 21-0149/NA. United States, Appellee/Cross-Appellant v. Paul E. Cooper, Appellant/Cross-Appellee. CCA 201500039. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the following issues:

 

I. AN ACCUSED HAS A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO HAVE HIS COUNSEL MAKE A PROPER ARGUMENT ON THE EVIDENCE AND APPLICABLE LAW IN HIS FAVOR. DID THE MILITARY JUDGE ABUSE HIS DISCRETION WHEN HE ALLOWED THE MEMBERS TO RECALL THE COMPLAINING WITNESS AFTER DELIBERATIONS BUT REFUSED THE DEFENSE REQUEST TO PRESENT A RENEWED CLOSING SUMMATION ON HER NEW TESTIMONY? DID THE LOWER COURT ERR BY REFUSING TO CONSIDER THIS ISSUE?

 

II. AN APPELLANT HAS THE RIGHT TO EFFECTIVE REPRESENTATION BY APPELLATE COUNSEL. WERE APPELLATE COUNSEL INEFFECTIVE WHERE: (1) COUNSEL FAILED TO ASSIGN AS ERROR THE MILITARY JUDGE'S DENIAL OF A RENEWED CLOSING ARGUMENT DESPITE DEFENSE COUNSEL'S OBJECTION AT TRIAL; (2) THIS COURT DECIDED UNITED STATES v. BESS, 75 M.J. 70 (C.A.A.F. 2016), ONE MONTH BEFORE COUNSEL FILED A SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF RAISING ASSIGNMENTS OF ERROR BEFORE THE LOWER COURT; AND (3) THE LOWER COURT REFUSED TO CONSIDER THE ISSUE WHEN IT WAS RAISED DURING A LATER REMAND TO THAT COURT?

 

Briefs will be filed under Rule 25.

 

Interlocutory Orders

 

No. 21-0150/NA. United States, Appellee/Cross-Appellant v. Paul E. Cooper, Appellant/Cross-Appellee. CCA 201500039. Appellant/Cross-Appellee's motion to take judicial notice of adjudicative facts is denied.

 

No. 21-0150/NA. United States, Appellee/Cross-Appellant v. Paul E. Cooper, Appellant/Cross-Appellee. CCA 201500039. Appellee/Cross-Appellant's motion to return or strike Appellant/Cross-Appellee's appendix to the reply to Appellee/Cross-Appellant's opposition to Appellant/Cross-Appellee's motion to take judicial notice of adjudicative facts is denied as moot.

 

No. 21-0222/NA. United States, Appellant v. Chase T. Miller, Appellee. CCA 201900234. Appellant's second motion to extend time to file a brief and joint appendix is granted to June 18, 2021.

 

No. 21-0246/AR. U.S. v. Stephen S. Lee. CCA 20180001. Appellee's motion to dismiss the petition for grant of review for lack of jurisdiction is granted.

 

No. 21-0262/AF. U.S. v. Zachary W. Rothe. CCA 39817. Appellant's second motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review is granted to July 6, 2021.

 

No. 21-0274/AF. U.S. v. Laurent A. Laguitan. CCA 39707. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review is granted to June 28, 2021.

 

No. 21-0275/AR. U.S. v. Michael D. Johnson. CCA 20190386. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review is granted to June 28, 2021.

 

Mandate Issued

 

No. 21-0017/AR. U.S. v. Clovis H. Castro. CCA 20190408.

 

Petition for Reconsideration Denied

 

No. 21-0025/AF. U.S. v. Matthew C. Harrington. CCA 2020-02. Appellee's petition for reconsideration of this Court's decision, United States v. Harrington, __ M.J. __ (C.A.A.F. 2021) is denied.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Monday, June 7, 2021

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 21-0274/AF. U.S. v. Laurent A. Laguitan. CCA 39707.

No. 21-0275/AR. U.S. v. Michael D. Johnson. CCA 20190386.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Friday, June 4, 2021

 

Order Granting Petition for Review

 

No. 21-0234/AR. U.S. v. Logan T. Kyle. CCA 20190372. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is granted on the following issue:

 

WHETHER THE CONVENING AUTHORITY'S FAILURE TO TAKE ACTION ON THE SENTENCE DEPRIVED THE ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF JURISDICTION UNDER ARTICLE 66, UCMJ.

 

No briefs will be filed under Rule 25.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Wednesday, June 2, 2021

 

Petition for Grant of Review Filed

 

No. 21-0273/AR. U.S. v. Robert C. McKee. CCA 20190680.




UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY JOURNAL

Tuesday, June 1, 2021

 

Petitions for Grant of Review Denied

 

No. 21-0226/AR. U.S. v. Deshawn E. Sturkey. CCA 20200351.

No. 21-0227/AR. U.S. v. Kevin Zazueta. CCA 20200188.

 

Petition for Grant of Review - Summary Disposition

 

No. 21-0196/AF. U.S. v. Ryan J. Michalec. CCA 39771. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals, we note that the members adjudged a sentence of a dishonorable discharge, confinement for 20 years, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and reduction to pay grade E-3. The record also shows that as a matter of clemency, the convening authority approved the adjudged sentence, without modification, but deferred adjudged forfeitures until action and waived automatic forfeitures in favor of Appellant's dependents. In its summary of the convening authority's action, the lower court correctly noted the deferral and waiver but incorrectly stated that the convening authority disapproved the adjudged forfeitures. It then affirmed the sentence (adding a footnote to change "total forfeitures" in the CMO to "forfeiture of all pay and allowances").

 

Appellant has not asserted any error by the lower court in this respect, nor has he complained that his dependents did not receive the money attributable to the deferred and waived forfeitures. However, it is unclear whether the forfeiture of all pay and allowances was affirmed. Under Article 67(c), Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), 10 U.S.C. 867(c) (2018), this Court can only act with respect to the findings and sentence as affirmed by a court of criminal appeals. If the affirmed sentence is ambiguous, the appropriate remedy is a remand for clarification. United States v. Kosek, 41 M.J. 60, 65 (C.M.A. 1994) ("The appropriate remedy for incomplete or ambiguous rulings is a remand for clarification."). Accordingly, because of the ambiguity as to the affirmed sentence, it is ordered that said petition is granted on the following specified issue:

 

WHETHER THE DECISION OF THE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS IS AMBIGUOUS AS TO WHETHER THE AFFIRMED SENTENCE INCLUDED FORFEITURE OF ALL PAY AND ALLOWANCES.

 

The decision of the United States Air Force 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 Air Force for remand to the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals for clarification as to the affirmed sentence. Thereafter Article 67, UCMJ, shall apply.

 

Interlocutory Orders

 

No. 20-0176/NA. U.S. v. Darrius D. Upshaw. CCA 201600053. On consideration of Appellee's motion to file a petition for reconsideration out of time of this Court's decision, United States v. Upshaw, __ M.J. __, (C.A.A.F. 2021), it is ordered that the motion to file the petition for reconsideration out of time is granted, the petition for reconsideration is granted, and the decretal paragraph of the subject opinion is modified to read, "The record is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy. A rehearing is authorized."

 

No. 21-0052/NA. U.S. v. Virginia S. Moratalla. CCA 201900073. Appellant's motion to extend time to file a reply brief is granted to June 22, 2021.

 

No. 21-0059/MC. U.S. v. Bradley M. Metz. CCA 201900089. Appellant's motion to extend time to file a reply brief is granted to June 21, 2021.

 

No. 21-0193/AR. U.S. v. Nidal M. Hasan. CCA 20130781. Appellant's motion to examine sealed appellate exhibits and the sealed portion of the trial transcript is granted.

 

No. 21-0267/AR. U.S. v. Mark W. Christensen. CCA 20190197. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review is granted to June 21, 2021.

 

No. 21-0269/MC. U.S. v. Chad M. Whitehead. CCA 202000196. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review is granted to June 21, 2021.

 

No. 21-0270/AR. U.S. v. Alec J. Olson. CCA 20190267. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review is granted to June 21, 2021.

 

No. 21-0271/MC. U.S. v. Malcolm E. Speight. CCA 202000099. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review is granted to June 21, 2021.

 

No. 21-0272/MC. U.S. v. Barnabas E. Pearson. CCA 201900314. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review is granted to June 21, 2021.



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