This week at SCOTUS: I’m not aware of any military justice developments at the Supreme Court.

This week at CAAF: CAAF will hear oral argument in two cases this week. Both arguments will occur at law schools in Wisconsin, as part of the court’s Project Outreach:

Tuesday, April 14, 2015, at noon, at Marquette University Law School, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

United States v. Plant, No. 15-0011/AF (CAAFlog case page)

Issue: Whether the evidence is legally sufficient to support the finding of guilty to Charge V and its specification (child endangerment) because the evidence failed to prove Appellant’s alcohol use alone amounted to culpable negligence that endangered the welfare of L.P.

Case Links:
AFCCA opinion
Appellant’s brief
Appellee’s (Government) brief
• Brief of Amicus Curiae (law students)
Blog post: Argument preview

Wednesday, April 15, 2015, at noon, at the University of Wisconsin Law School, Madison, Wisconsin:

United States v. Keefauver, No. 15-0029/AR (CAAFlog case page)

Issue: Whether the Army Court erred in finding that the protective sweep was appropriate in total.

Case Links:
ACCA opinion (73 M.J. 846)
Blog post: Army CCA affirms a protective sweep
Appellant’s brief
Appellee’s (Government) brief
Amicus brief in support of Appellant (law students)
Amicus brief in support of Appellee (law students)
• Blog post: Argument preview

This week at the ACCA: The next scheduled oral argument at the Army CCA is on April 23, 2015.

This week at the AFCCA: The Air Force CCA’s website shows no scheduled oral arguments.

This week at the CGCCA: The Coast Guard Trial Docket shows no scheduled oral arguments at the Coast Guard CCA.

This week at the NMCCA: The Navy-Marine Corps CCA will hear oral argument in one case this week, on Tuesday, April 14, 2015, at 10 a.m.:

United States v. Montalvo

Case summary: A panel of officer and enlisted members, sitting as a general court-martial, convicted the appellant, contrary to his pleas, of two specification of rape in violation of Article 120, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 920. The members sentenced the appellant to reduction to paygrade E-1, confinement for nine years, and a dishonorable discharge. The convening authority approved the sentence as adjudged and, except for the dishonorable discharge, ordered the sentence executed.

Issue: Did the military judge abuse his discretion in denying the defense’s continuance request and is Appellant entitled to relief only if the court also finds the error materially prejudiced a substatintial right of the Appellant’s?

One Response to “This Week in Military Justice – April 12, 2015”

  1. Don Rehkopf says:

    There is a case being argued this week at SCOTUS that should be of immense interest to military justice practitioners, viz., McFadden v. US, [discussed HERE]. It involves the issue of “analogue” drugs, e.g., Spice, etc., which I have argued is unconstitutional under Art. 112a and its 18 USC counterparts as being unconstitutionally vague.
    The briefs are available via the above link and I especially commend the Forensic Scientists’ Amicus Curie brief to your attention because if there’s no scientific basis for any of the government’s claims, then there are a bunch of people with “bad paper” sentenced by courts-martial.