In the wake of the AFCCA’s recent decision in Chapman v. United States, 75 M.J. 596 (A.F. Ct. Crim. App. Feb. 18, 2016) (discussed here), in which the court found that it lacks jurisdiction to consider a petition for a writ of habeas corpus because the court-martial is final under Article 76, the AFCCA recently decided two additional cases that also limit its jurisdiction to grant post-conviction relief.

In United States v. Williams, No. 2015-01 (A.F. Ct. Crim. App. Apr. 4, 2016) (link to slip op.), the CCA applies Chapman to a habeas petition in a case where the petitioner is on parole from a sentence of confinement adjudged by a court-martial, but appellate review in his case is complete. Writing for a three-judge panel, Senior Judge Mitchell concludes that “although a habeas petition is available for parolees, Petitioner’s writ is outside the military court’s limited jurisdiction.” Slip op. at 2.

In United States v. Refre, No. 2016-01 (A.F. Ct. Crim. App. Mar. 31, 2016) (link to slip op.), the CCA applies United States v. Arness, 74 M.J. 441 (C.A.A.F. 2015) (CAAFlog case page), to a coram nobis petition in a case where the adjudged sentence was below the Article 66(b) threshold for review. Writing for a three-judge panel, Senior Judge Mitchell concludes that “consideration of extraordinary relief is not ‘in aid’ of the CCA’s jurisdiction, because the CCA had none in the first place.” Slip op. at 3 (quoting Arness, 74 M.J. at 443).

Comments are closed.