The Golden CAAF II will keep grazing at the Kabul Klipper’s house for a while. As the No Man noted, the Supremes denied the cert petition in Smith v. United States, No. 10-18, on Monday.
The Supremes haven’t granted plenary review of a servicemember’s cert petition under 28 U.S.C. § 1259 since 8 November 1996, when it granted the cert petition in Edmond v. United States, 519 U.S. 977 (1996). (The Supremes did GVR one military cert petition since then — O’Connor, which was GVRed for further consideration in light of Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition. O’Connor v. United States, 535 U.S. 1014 (2002).)
Since granting review in Edmond, by my count, the Supremes have denied 238 servicemembers’ cert petitions.
The total number of military cert petitions filed under 28 U.S.C. § 1259 since the right was first established in 1983 has been, by my count, 979. There have been 9 plenary grants, six upon petition by a servicemember (Solorio, Weiss, Davis, Ryder, Edmond, Loving) and the most recent three upon petition by the SG (Scheffer, Clinton v. Goldsmith, Denedo). There have been 5 GVRs upon petition by an accused (Goodson v. United States, 471 U.S. 1063 (1985); Jordan v. United States, 498 U.S. 1009 (1990); Carpenter v. United States, 515 U.S. 1138 (1995); Clark v. United States, 515 U.S. 1138 (1995) (GVRing six CAAF decisions); and O’Connor) and one GVR upon petition by the SG. United States v. Mobley, 523 U.S. 1056 (1998) (GVRing three CAAF decisions for further consideration in light of Scheffer).
It appears that in the entire history of SCOTUS review of CMA/CAAF decisions, only one servicemember has received an actual sentence reduction as the result of petitioning for cert: Specialist Four Goodson, who got rid of his BCD (but not the other portions of his sentence) as the result of his GVR from SCOTUS for further consideration in light of Smith v. Illinois, 469 U.S. 91 (1984).