I’ll try to crunch some numbers this weekend, but my sense is that CAAF has granted review of a greater number of cases than at this point last year.  Here’s the issue that CAAF granted today:  “WHETHER THE SENTENCE MUST BE SET ASIDE BECAUSE THE MILITARY JUDGE DETERMINED THE SENTENCE BASED ON THE INCORRECT MAXIMUM PUNISHMENT.”  United States v. Beaty, __ M.J. ___, No.  10-0494/AF (C.A.A.F. July 14, 2010).  AFCCA’s unpublished decision in the case is available here.

The issue concerns whether importing a federal statute’s maximum punishment for a child pornography offense is appropriate where the accused is convicted under Article 134(1) or (2), where the government need not establish that an actual child is depicted.

Beaty continues CAAF’s recent rocket petition docket trend.  The petition was filed on 24 May and has now been granted less than two months later.

Comments are closed.