In the Air Force case of United States v. Dalmazzi, No. 16-0651/AF (grant discussed here), CAAF is considering whether a judge of the United States Court of Military Commission Review (appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate) may also serve as an appellate military judge on a court of criminal appeals.

The case ended last term with three trailers: United States v. Brown, No. 16-0714/AR (grant discussed here), United States v. Echols, No. 16-0720/AR, and United States v. Bustamonte, No. 16-0693/AR (grants discussed here).

Now it has three more:

No. 16-0732/AR. U.S. v. Kameron M. Coleman. CCA 20140709. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the following issues:

I. WHETHER ACCEPTANCE OF APPOINTMENT AS A CMCR JUDGE TERMINATED THE MILITARY COMMISSION OF JUDGE HERRING.

II. WHETHER, AS AN APPOINTED JUDGE OF THE CMCR, JUDGE HERRING DOES NOT MEET THE UCMJ DEFINITION OF AN APPELLATE MILITARY JUDGE.

III. WHETHER THE ASSIGNMENT OF INFERIOR OFFICERS AND PRINCIPAL OFFICERS TO A SINGLE JUDICIAL TRIBUNAL ITSELF VIOLATES THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE.

No briefs will be filed under Rule 25.

 

No. 16-0555/AR. U.S. v. Jason M. Commisso. CCA 20140205. On consideration of Appellant’s motion to enlarge the grant and vacate the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said motion is hereby granted as it pertains to enlarging the grant but denied as it pertains to vacating the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals.

I noted CAAF’s grant of review in Commisso here.

No. 16-0635/AR. U.S. v. Laith G. Cox. CCA 20130923. On consideration of Appellant’s petition for reconsideration of this Court’s Order issued September 7, 2016, it is ordered that said petition for reconsideration is hereby granted, and the petition for grant of review is hereby granted on the following issues:

I. WHETHER ACCEPTANCE OF APPOINTMENT AS A CMCR JUDGE TERMINATED THE MILITARY COMMISSIONS OF JUDGE HERRING AND JUDGE BURTON.

II. WHETHER, AS APPOINTED JUDGES OF THE CMCR, JUDGE HERRING AND JUDGE BURTON MEET THE UCMJ DEFINITION OF APPELLATE MILITARY JUDGE.

III. WHETHER THE ASSIGNMENT OF INFERIOR OFFICERS AND PRINCIPAL OFFICERS TO A SINGLE JUDICIAL TRIBUNAL ITSELF VIOLATES THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE.

No briefs will be filed under Rule 25.

One Response to “Three more trailer cases involving CMCR judges”

  1. Peanut Gallery says:

    Re arguing over the CMCR CCA thing, sounds like a lot of tax money about something very silly.