At 1654, the Court-Martial Trial Practice blog observed, “The Commissioner for the Panel advises that the case is United States v. Rosas (NFI). Apparently the website is to be updated very soon.” And now it has been.
ACCA’s web site’s hearing calendar now includes the following:
US v. Rosas
Goodson 20060075 2 1700, Thu., 5 Feb 2009
(Hearing at Harvard Law School)
The web site also includes this summary of the case:
United States v. ROSAS (ARMY 20060075), 5 February 2009 at 1700HRS
Ames Courtroom, Harvard Law School.
A general court-martial composed of a military judge alone convicted appellant, contrary to his pleas, of conspiracy to import, introduce, and/or distribute cocaine; three specifications (counts) of wrongful importation, introduction, and/or distribution of cocaine in the United States; seven specifications of wrongful distribution of cocaine; six specifications of wrongful transportation of currency (money laundering); wrongful transportation of firearm; and wrongful use, carrying, and/or possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime, in violation of Articles 81, 112a, and 134, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. §§ 881, 912a and 934 [hereinafter UCMJ]. The convening authority reduced the adjudged sentence to confinement from twenty-three years to twenty-two years and approved the remainder of the adjudged sentence to a dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and reduction to Private E1.
Appellate defense counsel raised eight assignments of error for the court’s consideration. At argument, counsel will address Assignments of Error III-V (lack of corroboration of appellant’s confessions); Assignment of Error VI (lack of factual and legal sufficiency); and Assignment of Error VII (the military judge impermissibly imposed a maximum possible punishment as a minimum sentence for an assimilated firearms offense).
The web site doesn’t provide any guidance as to members of the public (including members of the military) without a Harvard i.d. would be admitted to the argument.
Judge Maggs is a Harvard Law alumnus. I don’t know about the other two judges on the panel.