CAAF had a big day on Wednesday. Besides getting a new judge, the court granted review in an Army case:

No. 14-0009/AR.  U.S. v. Jesus GUTIERREZ, Jr.  CCA 20120104.  Review granted on the following issue:

WHETHER THE EVIDENCE OF STALKING WAS LEGALLY SUFFICIENT WHERE APPELLANT WAS ACQUITTED OF RAPE AND THE PROSECUTION RELIED ON THE EVIDENCE OF RAPE TO PROVE STALKING.

Best I can tell, the Army CCA didn’t issue a written opinion.

The court also received a certificate of review from the Army JAG:

No. 14-5001/AR.  U.S. v. Joshua R. SICKELS.  CCA 20110110.  Notice is hereby given that a certificate for review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals was filed under Rule 22 this date on the following issue:

WHETHER THE ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS ERRED WHEN IT HELD THAT DEFENSE COUNSEL’S INVESTIGATION AND PRESENTATION OF A SENTENCING CASE WAS INEFFECTIVE.

The Army CCA’s opinion is here. The ACCA set aside the sentence of LWOP due to IAC in sentencing. I discussed this opinion in this post.

Finally, the court denied the advocacy group “Protect our Defenders” leave to file an amicus brief out of time:

No. 13-0607/AF.  U.S. v. Matthew J. SOUSA.  CCA 37889.  On consideration of Appellant’s motion to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review under seal, and the motion of Protect our Defenders for leave to file an Amicus Curiae brief in support of this Court’s review of the MIL.R.EVID. 412 Balancing Test, it is ordered that Appellant’s motion to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review under seal is hereby granted, and the motion of Protect our Defenders for leave to file an Amicus Curiae brief in support of this Court’s review of the MIL.R.EVID. 412 Balancing Test is hereby denied as untimely filed under Rule 26(b), C.A.A.F. Rules of Practice and Procedure.

The AFCCA’s published opinion is here. I discussed this opinion in this post. I also discussed the recent elimination of the special balancing test in M.R.E. 412 in this post.

Comments are closed.