Comments on: CAAF reverses AFCCA decision due to former Chief Judge’s post-recusal recommendation of his replacement

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 13 May 2010 12:28:03 +0000

I wish we still had the option of giving a little “thumbs up” icon.

By: Cap'n Crunch

Cap'n Crunch — Thu, 13 May 2010 02:05:58 +0000

No offense intended to anyone, however, it is my firm and unequivocal belief that the service CCAs have, particularly in the last 20 years or so, substantially turned away from justice, and instead turned themselves into bodies that correct pen and ink changes or take administrative action on cases, but afford no substantial relief. There are exceptions. NMCCA lately seems to be such an exception.

And no offense is directed to Judge Matthews, but the Air Force Court has particularly been results-oriented and pro-government. It is well known (though perhaps not well advertised for good reason) that the best (and usually only) chance of relief, where you have good appellate issues, is to go to CAAF. The only caveat I will make to this trend, seems to be in the death penalty arena. For some reason (and I have my own theory on why this is), the service courts do seem to bend over backwards to get those right (I will withhold judgment on AFCCA until I see the Witt decision — though I am frankly unaware of any ‘good’ or meaty issues in that case — but insiders working on it would know more).

Which begs the question: why not do away with the service courts, replace them with a lower court of appeals that is not made up of active duty JAGs (but could have retired JAGs unlike CAAF judges), appoint them for 15 year terms, and let them handle the functions that the service courts handle now?

By: Article16

Article16 — Wed, 12 May 2010 17:42:21 +0000

Haven’t you ever seen an appellate decision based on whether an appellant is entitled to a single additional day of confinement credit?
Errors are errors. Diligence is diligence. In some cases, if an SJA or CA were at all inclined to give credence to allegations of error made at clemency, then the avoidance of waste is in their hands–if it’s “invited” it’s they who invited it. Personally, I think appellate litigation over non-REAL issues is great.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 12 May 2010 11:53:26 +0000

Touché!

By: Christopher Mathews

Christopher Mathews — Tue, 11 May 2010 22:10:46 +0000

“Seniority” is an interesting concept — at least when I served, seniority was determined not by rank but by longevity on the court. The exception was that the chief judge was designated by TJAG and senior regardless of date of rank or how long he or she served on the court.

I’m not sure whether Judge Francis was senior to the other members of the Court when TJAG designated him as acting chief judge. One complicating factor may have been the existence of conflicts that kept other judges who might have been senior to him from hearing the case. I do not know if there were such conflicts, but it would not surprise me if there were.

By: Dew_Process

Dew_Process — Tue, 11 May 2010 20:12:58 +0000

I guess it would be too simple to follow the other federal Circuit Courts of Appeal – if the CJ is absent or recused, the next most senior judge becomes “acting” CJ.

Equally as troublesome is the fact that the replacement CJ, Judge Francis, was allowed to hand-pick his “panel.” That smells just as bad imho.

By: Christopher Mathews

Christopher Mathews — Tue, 11 May 2010 19:29:51 +0000

At the end of the day, to borrow a phrase from Anon 1514 below, CAAF was unable to discern any prejudice to the appellant nor any evidence that Chief Judge Wise influenced the appellate panel on remand. While the court was clearly and properly sensitive to the “appearance of impartiality” as seen from “an outsider’s perspective,” it’s a substantial reach to say this case justifies abolishing the CCAs.

By: Anon

Anon — Tue, 11 May 2010 19:14:42 +0000

And, at the end of the day, after all of this appellate litigation, apparently the only REAL appellate issue is sentence disparity???? Wow… what a waste. The rest of this is invented or invited error.

By: retort

retort — Tue, 11 May 2010 18:53:03 +0000

I really like the full e-mail quote. This opinion (along with plenty of CCA opinions from the horse’s mouth) is good fodder for abolishing or “civilianizing” the CCAs.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 11 May 2010 16:35:46 +0000

I’m glad the court recognizes the perception that these “judges” are JAGs filling a billet and some of them really need the oversight.

By: Ama Goste

Ama Goste — Tue, 11 May 2010 16:17:06 +0000

Mike,

Walker’s “order of succession” memo comes to mind, but you’re more familiar with that case than I am.

By: Mike "No Man" Navarre

Mike "No Man" Navarre — Tue, 11 May 2010 15:04:44 +0000

Is there any precedent in military justice for a Chief Judge appointing his successor? I can’t believe this would ever happen again so this case won’t likely be cited again.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 11 May 2010 03:30:12 +0000

I guess the old saying still stands…it takes a lot to kill a roach!

By: JWS

JWS — Tue, 11 May 2010 03:04:11 +0000

I have not read much of the CAAF ouevre, buts I am sure Dickens is a better read nonetheless.