On Thursday CAAF granted review of what appears to be a trailer of its grant in United States v. Phillips, No. 14-0199/AR (grant discussed here) (CCA opinion discussed here):

No. 14-0491/AR. U.S. v. Jacob T. NEMETH. CCA 20120653. Review granted on the following issue:

WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE ABUSED HIS DISCRETION BY ACCEPTING APPELLANT’S PLEA OF GUILT TO DISOBEYING THE ORDER OF HIS COMMANDER IN VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 90, UCMJ, WHEN THE ULTIMATE OFFENSE AT ISSUE WAS THE MINOR OFFENSE OF RESTRICTION BREAKING DESCRIBED UNDER ARTICLE 134, UCMJ, AND THE RECORD DOES NOT REFLECT APPELLANT’S UNDERSTANDING THAT THE ORDER IMPOSING RESTRICTION WAS ISSUED WITH THE FULL AUTHORITY OF HIS COMMANDER’S OFFICE TO LIFT THE DUTY “ABOVE THE COMMON RUCK.”

No briefs will be filed under Rule 25.

How many cases does it take before it’s a trailer park?

3 Responses to “An ultimate offense doctrine trailer park?”

  1. Dew_Process says:

    3 – at least one on either side of the original!

  2. Zachary D Spilman says:

    OK, but the granted issue in Nemeth is practically verbatim the granted issue in Phillips… in other words, is there extra credit for proximity?

  3. J says:

    Extra credit would be like a double-wide, still only counts as one trailer.