Here is the stay order from the Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals in US v Johnson, the case where military judge CDR Marcus Fulton found apparent UCI for President Obama’s remarks about his desired outcome of military sexual assault cases.  Here is the writ filed by the government in the case.  The case is nominally captioned United States v. Marcus Fulton, No. 201300233–which for anyone that’s served with Judge Fulton is amusing to say the least.

4 Responses to “Ex Writ in Presidential UCI Ruling Cases”


    I was unaware that the NMCCA was allowed to entertain such a thing. Is the government allowed to petition a writ of mandamus in the middle of a proceeding? Isn’t this brought up after the trial has concluded and is on its way to appeals?

  2. Christopher Mathews says:

    @ NSM – It is unusual.  However, as the government pointed out in its writ petition, there is no path for the government to seek redress on appeal.  If the members are not permitted to include a punitive discharge in their sentence, there’s no way to add one on appeal.  At this stage, as I understand it, NMCCA has not decided whether it can issue a writ; it has simply stayed the trial proceedings.


    @ Christopher Mathews – The government brings up another interesting point that the CAAF is currently considering this issue in Hutchins and it would be ironic if they were to proceed under this granted motion when weeks later it was decided in Hutchins that no such UCI existed. Wouldn’t it be even more ironic and affect both the cases if the NMCAA made a ruling in either direction? 

  4. Christopher Mathews says:

    @ NSM – If CAAF resolves that case broadly enough to address the questions here, yes, it would be.  I suspect that unless NMCCA concludes it can’t consider the writ, it will leave the stay in place till Hutchins is decided.