Comments on: Potential problems for potential jurisdiction http://www.caaflog.com/2009/06/09/potential-problems-for-potential-jurisdiction/ Covering the Military Justice System Tue, 07 Sep 2010 07:34:49 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Marcus Fulton http://www.caaflog.com/2009/06/09/potential-problems-for-potential-jurisdiction/#comment-7911 Marcus Fulton Wed, 10 Jun 2009 04:32:46 +0000 http://tx18.westnic.net/~caaflog/?p=2083#comment-7911 I agree that Denedo doesn't have anything to say directly relating to other writs. But one tends to find these other writs in cases that have not (or not yet) satisfied the jurisdictional criteria of Article 66. <br /><br />I got a little sloppy at the end of the post in suggesting that the rationale for other writs had been eroded. If there was a reason for a writ of mandamus to issue after the conclusion of an appeal, I think Denedo would support it. The point of the post is that the heavy lifting done by extraordinary writs happens pretrial, and under a theory of jurisdiction that seems to me may be broader than the one contemplated by the Denedo majority. I agree that Denedo doesn't have anything to say directly relating to other writs. But one tends to find these other writs in cases that have not (or not yet) satisfied the jurisdictional criteria of Article 66.

I got a little sloppy at the end of the post in suggesting that the rationale for other writs had been eroded. If there was a reason for a writ of mandamus to issue after the conclusion of an appeal, I think Denedo would support it. The point of the post is that the heavy lifting done by extraordinary writs happens pretrial, and under a theory of jurisdiction that seems to me may be broader than the one contemplated by the Denedo majority.

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.caaflog.com/2009/06/09/potential-problems-for-potential-jurisdiction/#comment-7896 Anonymous Tue, 09 Jun 2009 21:32:12 +0000 http://tx18.westnic.net/~caaflog/?p=2083#comment-7896 Which is to say, the inherent existence of coram nobis in Art. 66 - the single 'narrow question' decided by Kennedy - says nothing about the propriety of other writs, as you suggest. Which is to say, the inherent existence of coram nobis in Art. 66 – the single 'narrow question' decided by Kennedy – says nothing about the propriety of other writs, as you suggest.

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.caaflog.com/2009/06/09/potential-problems-for-potential-jurisdiction/#comment-7895 Anonymous Tue, 09 Jun 2009 21:16:39 +0000 http://tx18.westnic.net/~caaflog/?p=2083#comment-7895 This is not correct. Read Kennedy again. The All Writs Act DOES NOT SUPPLY JURISDICTION, but merely confirms the existence of writ powers. The power is found inherent in Art. 66 at the CCA, and inherent in CAAF's power to review the CCA. This is not correct. Read Kennedy again. The All Writs Act DOES NOT SUPPLY JURISDICTION, but merely confirms the existence of writ powers. The power is found inherent in Art. 66 at the CCA, and inherent in CAAF's power to review the CCA.

]]>