CAAF granted review in two Army cases yesterday. The grants were posted on the CAAF web site today.

In United States v. Resch, No. 06-0863/AR, CAAF granted review of two issues and specified two more. The first issue is whether the military judge improperly considered appellant’s statements during the providence inquiry into the LIO of UA during trial on the greater offense of desertion. The second issue is the legal sufficiency of intent evidence on the desertion offense. The first specified issue concerns whether the military judge erroneously failed to inquire into a potential early termination of the UA. The second specified issue is the legal sufficiency of the evidence of the termination date.

ACCA’s opinion below does not appear to be available online.

In United States v. Hamilton, No. 06-0926/AR, the sole granted issue is “whether the military judge erred by failing to specify the occasion upon which the finding of guilty to distribution of valium was based. See United States v. Scheurer, 62 M.J. 100 (C.A.A.F. 2005).”

Again, the opinion below doesn’t appear to be online. Given the description and cite, this appears to be a case where the accused was charged with distribution on divers occasions resulting in a finding of guilty by exceptions and substitutions to a single occasion but without the factfinder specifying which occasion that was.

Comments are closed.