In February, I “wonder[ed] what has to happen to cause an accused to request extraordinary relief at an Article 32.”

In April, I noted that the AFCCA denied a petition for extraordinary relief seeking expert assistance at an Article 32 (in a different case from the February question). United States v. Holsey, Misc. Dkt. No. 2012-02 (A. F. Ct. Crim. App., April 3, 2012) (order).

CAAF, it seems, might have an answer to my original question. From the Daily Journal for Monday, June 4:

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

Misc. No. 12-8022/AF.  Steven J. HOLSEY, Petitioner v. United States, Respondent.  On consideration of the petition for extraordinary relief in the nature of a temporary restraining order enjoining an Article 32 Hearing in Petitioner’s case scheduled for 9 a.m., Monday, June 4, 2012, it is ordered that said Article 32 hearing is hereby stayed pending further order of the Court, and that Respondent will file an answer to said petition no later than 5:00 p.m. on this date.

Holsey is an interlocutory case from the Air Force, and may eventually involve a capital referral, but for now I’m still keeping a different interlocutory Air Force case as my pick for “best case of the term.”

Comments are closed.