I discussed the Coast Guard CCA’s decision in United States v. Sullivan, No. 001-69-13 (C.G. Ct. Crim. App. Sep. 25, 2014), in this post, commenting that the case was notable for a number of reasons including that it involves a Coast Guard Captain (O-6) who was convicted contrary to his pleas of not guilty, by a general court-martial composed of officer members, of a single specification of wrongful use of cocaine in violation of Article 112a. He was sentenced to pay a $5,000 fine and to be reprimanded. That sentence did not trigger automatic review by the CCA, but the Judge Advocate General of the Coast Guard referred the case to the CCA under Article 69(d).

Now the case goes to CAAF:

No. 15-0186/CG. U.S. v. Michael E. Sullivan. CCA 001-69-13. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the following issues:

I. WHETHER THE GOVERNMENT CARRIED ITS BURDEN OF PROVING THAT THE CONVENING AUTHORITY’S CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION OF ALL FLAG OFFICERS WAS HARMLESS.

II. WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE ABUSED HIS DISCRETION IN DENYING CHALLENGES FROM BOTH PARTIES TO HIS IMPARTIALITY BASED ON PRIOR PERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS WITH INDIVIDUAL MILITARY COUNSEL, THE ACCUSED, TRIAL COUNSEL, SEVERAL MEMBERS, SEVERAL WITNESSES, AND THE STAFF JUDGE ADVOCATE.

Briefs will be filed under Rule 25.

Comments are closed.