CAAF granted review of two issues in Sutton today (one raised by counsel and the second specified):

I.  Whether the military judge erred in denying the defense motion to suppress Appellant’s oral and written statements based on a violation of Article 31, UCMJ.

II.  Whether the facts charged in the specification are sufficient as a matter of law to support a charge for solicitation of indecent liberties with a child under Article 134, UCMJ, where the person solicited was that child.

United States v. Sutton, __ M.J. __, No. 09-0458/AF (C.A.A.F. Sept. 3, 2009).  AFCCA’s unpublished decision in the case is available here.  United States v. Sutton, No. ACM 37155 (A.F. Ct. Crim. App. Jan. 29, 2009).

Comments are closed.