This week at the Supremes:  There are no anticipated military justice developments at the Supremes on my radar screen for this week.

This week at CAAF:  This week will see the return of oral arguments to E Street, with three arguments on the bill–and all three are Air Force cases.  On Tuesday, CAAF will first hear oral argument in United States v. Lloyd, No. 09-0755AF, where the granted issue is “WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE ABUSED HER DISCRETION WHEN SHE DENIED THE DEFENSE REQUEST FOR AN EXPERT CONSULTANT IN THE FIELD OF BLOOD SPATTER.”  AFCCA’s unpublished decision in the case is available here.  Tuesday’s second case is United States v. Ayala, No. 10-0013/AF, where the granted issue is:  “WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE ERRED IN FINDING APPELLANT’S ADDITIONAL URINALYSES CONDUCTED PURSUANT TO UNITED STATES v. BICKEL, 30 M.J. 277 (C.M.A. 1990), WERE FOR A PERMISSIBLE PURPOSE.”  AFCCA’s unpublished decision in the case is available here.  Wednesday’s argument is in United States v. Contreras, No. 09-0754/AF, where the granted issue is: “WHETHER THE HOUSEBREAKING CHARGE SHOULD BE SET ASIDE BECAUSE THE UNDERLYING CRIMINAL OFFENSE, INDECENT ACTS WITH ANOTHER UNDER ARTICLE 134, UCMJ, IS A PURELY MILITARY OFFENSE.”  AFCCA’s unpublished decision in the case is available here.

This week at the CCAs:  On Tuesday, NMCCA will hear oral argument in United States v. Phillips on this issue:  “WHETHER THE EVIDENCE IS LEGALLY AND FACTUALLY INSUFFICIENT TO SUSTAIN THE APPELLANT’S CONVICTION FOR THE SOLE SPECIFICATION OF VIOLATING ART. 134, UCMJ, WHERE THE GOVERNMENT FAILED TO PRESENT ANY EVIDENCE THAT THE APPELLANT’S CONDUCT WAS PREJUDICIAL TO GOOD ORDER AND DISCIPLINE AND SERVICE DISCREDITING.”

On Thursday, ACCA will hear oral argument in United States v. Dear, No. ARMY 20080786, on these assignments of error:

I.  THE MILITARY JUDGE ERRED WHEN HE INSTRUCTED THE PANEL ON THE DISTINCT OFFENSE OF INDECENT ACTS, WHICH IS NOT A LESSER-INCLUDED OFFENSE OF RAPE.

II.  THERE WAS A MATERIAL FATAL VARIANCE BETWEEN THE SPECIFICATION AND THE FINDINGS WHICH DENIED APPELLANT THE ABILITY TO DEFEND HIMSELF AGAINST THE NEW CHARGE

This week at the trial court level:  The capital court-martial of United States v. Hennis will continue at Fort Bragg.  The defense is currently presenting its case-in-chief.  According to this Fayetteville Observer report, the trial will resume on Tuesday at 0900, when the defense may present one additional witness followed by the prosecution’s case in rebuttal.

Comments are closed.