CAAF heard oral argument in 6 cases with issues certified by one of the Judge Advocates General (Muwwakkil, Quick, Katso, Piolunek, Morita, and Buford). The court resolved another 3 certified cases by summary disposition (Huey, Soto, and Bowser). In total the court acted in 9 cases with certified issues this term.

Of those 9 cases, 7 (78%) were from the Air Force. That’s a slight decrease from last term’s 82%, but still gives me reason to recall my post about the appearance of bias in the certification of cases by the Judge Advocate General of the Air Force. The other two certified cases this term were from the Army (Muwwakkil) and the Marines (Quick).

The Government won in 4 of the 9 certifications (44%): Katso, Piolunek, Buford, and Huey (resolved summarily as a Piolunek trailer that mooted the certified issue). Notably, Piolunek involved a cross-certification; the JAG certified an issue after CAAF granted review of the CCA’s decision. The certified issue in Piolunek was also summarily rejected by CAAF as presenting a question of fact that the court lacks jurisdiction to consider.

The court specified issues for oral argument in two cases (Gilbreath and Arness), a Marine Corps case and an Air Force case. The specified issues were dispositive in both cases.

Of the 37 cases heard at oral argument, the CCAs were represented as follows:

  • 13 were from the Air Force CCA.
  • 15 were from the Army CCA.
  • 8 were from the Navy-Marine Corps CCA.
  • 1 was from the Coast Guard CCA.

Of these:

  • The Air Force CCA was reversed in 8 out of 13 cases (62%).
  • The Army CCA was reversed in 6 out of 16 cases (38%).
  • The Navy-Marine Corps CCA was reversed in 4 out of 8 cases (50%).
  • The Coast Guard CCA was reversed in 0 out of 1 case.

Comments are closed.