This week at the Supremes: The Supremes are done with their military justice work for the term. The fate of the three pending military cert petitions — Wuterich v. United States, No. 08-1133; Rodriguez v. United States, No. 08-1465; and Stephens v. United States, No. 08-1514 — will probably be decided at the 29 September 2009 conference and certainly not before then. [Familiar disclaimer: I’m counsel of record for the petitioner in both Wuterich and Stephens.)
This week at CAAF: CAAF is done with oral arguments for the term.
This week at the CCAs: ACCA will hear three oral arguments tomorrow. First up is United States v. Pettibone, No. ARMY 20070485, where the assignment of error being argued is: “THE EVIDENCE IS LEGALLY AND FACTUALLY INSUFFICIENT TO SUPPORT THE FINDINGS OF GUILTY FOR ASSAULT WITH A DANGEROUS WEAPON IN THE SPECIFICATION OF CHARGE I AND FOR MAIMING IN THE SPECIFICATION OF CHARGE II WHERE THE GOVERNMENT FAILED TO PROVE THAT APPELLANT DID NOT ACT IN SELF DEFENSE.” ACCA will then hear argument in United States v. Markis, No. ARMY 20070580 (a civilian counsel case), where the assignments of error being argued are: “THE EVIDENCE IS LEGALLY AND FACTUALLY INSUFFICIENT TO SUSTAIN APPELLANT’S CONVICTION FOR RAPE”; “THE MILITARY JUDGE ABUSED HIS DISCRETION WHEN HE IMPROPERLY EXCLUDED SGM RICHARDSON FROM THE PANEL FOR CAUSE”; and “THE MILITARY JUDGE VIOLATED M.R.E. 704 WHEN HE WOULD NOT ALLOW THE DEFENSE EXPERT, DR. CHRISTIAN MEISSNER, TO PRESENT AN EXPERT OPINION ON WHETHER SSG MARKIS WOULD BE SUBJECT TO HEIGHTENED SUGGESTIBILITY AND MANIPULATION AS A RESULT OF THE INTERROGATIONS HE UNDERWENT.” Tomorrow afternoon, ACCA will hear oral argument in United States v. Clark, No. ARMY 20070957, on this assignment of error: “THE EVIDENCE IS LEGALLY AND FACTUALLY INSUFFICIENT TO SUSTAIN APPELLANT’S CONVICTION FOR RAPE.”