This week at SCOTUS: On March 5 a petition for certiorari was filed in the case of Lomax v. United States Senate Armed Forces Services Committee, et al., No. 11-1098. The Third Circuit affirmed, in a 4-page opinion, the sua sponte dismissal by the District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, of Lomax’s claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging:

that he had endured racial discrimination while serving in the United States Navy between 1988 and 1991 and that this discrimination caused him to be deprived of the Congressional Medal of Honor award. Lomax asked the District Court to order a United States Department of Defense investigation into his military service. Lomax seeks the investigation in order to: 1) correct errors in his military service record caused by the alleged racial discrimination; and 2) determine his eligibility for the Congressional Medal of Honor.

This week at CAAF: CAAF’s calendar shows possible oral arguments on Monday and Tuesday this week, but only Monday’s schedule is filled:

Monday, March 12, 2012:

United States v. Easton, No. 12-0053/AR

Issue: Whether the Army court erred in holding the appellant’s trial did not violate his constitutional right against double jeopardy because jeopardy did not attach and even if it did, manifest necessity justified the convening authority’s decision to withdraw charges.

Case Links:
ACCA’s published opinion
Appellant’s brief
Appellee’s (government) brief
Appellant’s reply brief

Followed by:

United States v. Cooper, No. 12-6004/AR

Certified Issues:
(I) Whether the military judge and the Army Court of Criminal Appeals erred in applying Michigan v. Mosley, 423 U.S. 96 (1975) as opposed to Oregon v. Bradshaw, 462 U.S. 1039 (1983) and Edwards v. Arizona, 451 U.S. 477 (1981) to the facts of this case.
(II) Whether the military judge erred in finding the Accused’s statement was involuntarily made.
(III) Whether the military judge erred in suppressing the accused’s entire typewritten statement based on a second alleged violation of his right to remain silent.

Case Links:
ACCA’s opinion
Appellant’s (government) brief
Appellee’s brief
Appellant’s reply brief

Followed by:

United States v. McClain, No. 12-0099/AR

Issue: Whether the evidence is legally sufficient to support appellant’s conviction of possessing child pornography.

Case Links:
ACCA’s opinion
Appellant’s brief
Appellee’s (government) brief

This week at the ACCA: The Army CCA will hear oral argument in the case of United States v. Gray, No. 20090259, on Wednesday, March 14, 2012. The case involves an Army Captain who was convicted, contrary to his pleas, of the premeditated murder of his wife, and sentenced to confinement for life with the possibility of parole.

Case Links:
Appellant’s brief
Appellee’s (government) brief

This week at the AFCCA: The Air Force CCA will hear oral argument in United States v. Bazar on Thursday, March 15, 2012.

This week at the CGCCA: The Coast Guard Trial Docket shows one case pending at the Coast Guard CCA, and set for argument on May 7, 2012.

This week at the NMCCA: The Navy-Marine Corps CCA will hear oral argument in United States v. Valentin, Jr. on Wednesday, March 14, 2012, on the following issue:

(I) Whether the military judge erred in instructing the members on the elements of Article 120(b) by instructing on a constructive force theory?

4 Responses to “This Week in Military Justice – 11 March 2012”

  1. Some DC says:

    It is not the “Congressional Medal of Honor” it is the “Medal of Honor” which also made the presentation at the CAAF Conference a bit humorous as the professor kept referring to the topic of his premise by the wrong name.  

  2. stewie says:

    Wonder how it will affect our withdrawal. It seems pretty clear to me that the smartest thing to do at this point is to get out of that area sooner rather than later. Declare mission accomplished and end it.

  3. Michael Lowrey says:

    Just listened to the oral arguments in Cooper. Not exactly a great start for the government when it admitted by the 5 minute mark that it would have to do further research as to whether two of the three issues it had certified were even properly before CAAF. Ouch.