This week at SCOTUS: I’m not aware of any military justice developments at the Supreme Court. There is currently one active petition for certiorari in a military justice case: Easton v. United States, No. 12-210 (pending a response from the SG, due on December 12).
This week at CAAF: The next scheduled oral argument at CAAF is on January 22, 2013.
This week at the ACCA: The Army CCA will hear oral argument in one case this week, on Thursday, December 13, 2012:
United States v. Ramirez, No. 20100888
I. Whether the evidence is legally and factually insufficient to sustain a conviction for aggravated sexual assault, where the evidence adduced at trial does not support a finding that the alleged victim was substantially incapacitated.
II. Whether appellant was denied his sixth amendment right to effective assistance of counsel where the trial defense counsel failed to object to irrelevant and inadmissible hearsay testimony, failed to object to impermissible argument, and failed to call a material witness to assist the defense.
III. Whether appellant was denied his sixth amendment right to effective assistance of counsel at his presentencing hearing where defense counsel (1) failed to conduct a proper investigation and present vital evidence to the enlisted panel and (2) presented a sentencing argument that consisted of one page in the record of trial before the panel sentenced appellant to fifteen years confinement and a dishonorable discharge.
This week at the AFCCA: There are no scheduled oral arguments posted on the Air Force CCA’s website.
This week at the CGCCA: The Coast Guard Trial Docket shows no pending cases at the Coast Guard CCA.
This week at the NMCCA: There Navy-Marine Corps CCA will hear oral argument in one case this week, on Tuesday, December 11, 2012:
United States v. Escocheasanchez
A general court-martial composed of officer members with enlisted representation convicted Appellant, contrary to his pleas, of one specification of aggravated sexual assault, one specification of attempted aggravated sexual assault, two specifications of indecent act, one specification of indecent exposure, one specification of wrongful sexual contact, and two specifications of obstruction of justice in violation of Articles 120 and 134, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. §§ 920 and 934. The members sentenced Appellant to reduction to pay grade E-1, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, confinement for 15 years, and a dishonorable discharge. The Convening Authority approved the sentence as adjudged, and except for the dishonorable discharge, ordered it executed.
Whether Article 120(c) is unconstitutional as applied when the military judge (1) required appellant to prove the affirmative defenses of consent and mistake of fact as to consent by a preponderance of the evidence; (2) determined that the defenses had been proved by a preponderance of the evidence; and then (3) failed to dismiss the charges sua sponte as required by Rule for Courts-Martial 917.