CAAFlog » TWIMJ

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

This week at CAAF: The next scheduled oral argument at CAAF is on April 28, 2014.

This week at the ACCA: The next scheduled oral argument at the Army CCA is on May 8, 2014.

This week at the AFCCA: The next scheduled oral argument at the Air Force CCA is on April 23, 2014.

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’s website shows no scheduled oral arguments.

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 one case this week, on Wednesday, April 9, 2014. This will be a project outreach oral argument held at Florida International University College of Law in Miami, Florida.

United States v. Jones, No. 14-0071/AR (CAAFlog case page)

Issue: Whether the military judge abused his discretion when he denied the defense’s motion to suppress appellant’s statement to the military police.

Case Links:
• ACCA opinion (summary affirmation)
• Appellant’s brief
• Appelllee’s (Government) brief
• Amicus brief
• Blog post: Argument preview

This week at the ACCA: The next scheduled oral argument at the Army CCA is on May 28, 2014.

This week at the AFCCA: The next scheduled oral argument at the Air Force CCA is on April 23, 2014.

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 Thursday, April 10, 2014:

United States v. Evans 

Case summary: A panel of members sitting as a general court-martial, convicted appellant, contrary to his plea, of one specification of possession of child pornography in violation of Article 134, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 934 (2012). The members sentenced appellant to eighteen months confinement and a dishonorable discharge. The Convening Authority approved the sentence as adjudged and, except for the dishonorable discharge, ordered it executed.

Issues:
I. The constitution protects an accused’s right to a speedy trial. Here, Petty Officer Evans suffered prejudice from pretrial delay due to administrative and manpower constraints. Did this violate his constitutional right to a speedy trial?
II. After withdrawing a charge from a court-martial, a convening authority may not refer the withdrawn charge to another court-martial unless the withdrawal was for a proper reason. Here, though the withdrawal was solely due to prosecutorial ineptitude, the military judge allowed the convening authority re-refer. Did this error prejudice Petty Officer Evans?

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

This week at CAAF: The next scheduled oral argument at CAAF is on April 9, 2014. This will be a project outreach oral argument held at Florida International University College of Law in Miami, Florida.

This week at the ACCA: The Army CCA will hear oral argument in United States v. Hurts, No. 20120301, on Wednesday, April 2, 2014, at 10 a.m. The issues are:

I. Whether the evidence is factually sufficient to sustain a conviction of assault with a means likely to produce death or grievous bodily harm upon PFC AJ, PFC CJ, SPC JK, PFR RV, and PFC PM.
II. Whether the military judge abused his discretion in concluding that CPT [K] was an adequate substitute for Dr. [B].

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 next scheduled oral argument at the Navy-Marine Corps CCA is on April 10, 2014.

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

This week at CAAF: The next scheduled oral argument at CAAF is on April 9, 2014. This will be a project outreach oral argument held at Florida International University College of Law in Miami, Florida.

This week at the ACCA: The next scheduled oral argument at the Army CCA is on April 2, 2014.

This week at the AFCCA: The Air Force CCA will hear oral argument in United States v. Lovely on Thursday, March 27, 2014, at 10 a.m. No other information about the case is available on the CCA’s website.

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 United States v. Henderson on Wednesday, March 26, 2014, at 10 a.m.

Case summary: In a mixed pleas case, a panel of officers sitting as a general court-martial convicted the appellant, contrary to his pleas, of one specification of attempted wrongful sexual contact and one specification of wrongful sexual contact, as a lesser-included offense to the charged offense of aggravated sexual assault, in violation Articles 80 and 120, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. §§ 880, 920 (2008). The same panel convicted the appellant, pursuant to his plea, of one specification of fraternization, in violation of Article 92, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 892 (2008). The members sentenced the appellant to confinement for three months, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and dismissal from the naval service. The convening authority approved the sentence as adjudged and, except for the punitive discharge, ordered it executed.

Issue: Whether the military judge abused his discretion by failing to instruct the members on consent where some evidence of consent was raised by the alleged victim’s testimony that she willingly accompanied the appellant to a secluded part of the ship, that she kissed the appellant consensually, and that she did not tell the appellant to stop until after the appellant lifted her shirt and began kissing her breasts?

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

This week at CAAF: The next scheduled oral argument at CAAF is on April 9, 2014. This will be a project outreach oral argument held at Florida International University College of Law in Miami, Florida.

This week at the ACCA: The next scheduled oral argument at the Army CCA is on April 2, 2014.

This week at the AFCCA: The Air Force CCA will hear oral argument in United States v. Cron on Thursday, March 20, 2014. The argument will occur at the Georgetown University Law Center, 600 New Jersey Avenue, NW Washington, DC, at noon. No case information is available on the CCA’s website.

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 next scheduled oral argument at the Navy-Marine Corps CCA is on March 26, 2104.

Significant military justice event this week: The annual meeting of the Code Committee will occur on Tuesday, March 11, 2014, at 10 a.m, at the courthouse.

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

This week at CAAF: The next scheduled oral argument at CAAF is on April 9, 2014. This will be a project outreach oral argument held at Florida International University College of Law in Miami, Florida.

This week at the ACCA: The next scheduled oral argument at the Army CCA is on April 2, 2014.

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 Thursday, March 13, 2014:

United States v. Green

Case summary: A military judge sitting as a general court-martial convicted the appellant, pursuant to his pleas, of one specification of wrongful appropriation and one specification of communicating indecent language, in violation of Articles 121 and 134, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. §§ 921, 934 (2006). The military judge convicted the appellant, contrary to his pleas, of one specification of rape of a child, two specifications of aggravated sexual contact with a child, one additional specification of wrongful appropriation, and two specifications of sodomy with a child, in violation of Articles 120, 121 and 125, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. §§ 920, 921, 925 (2006). The military judge sentenced the appellant to 140 months confinement, reduction to pay-grade E-1, and a dishonorable discharge. The convening authority approved the sentence as adjudged and, except for the punitive discharge, ordered it executed.

Issue: WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE REVERSIBLY ERRED IN FAILING TO SUPPRESS THE APPELLANT’S UNCORROBORATED CONFESSIONS?

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 on Tuesday, March 4, 2014:

United States v. Davis, No. 14-0029/AR (CAAFlog case page),

Issue: Whether the Army Court of Criminal Appeals erred in finding that the military judge’s failure to instruct on the affirmative defense of defense of property was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.

Case Links:
• ACCA opinion
• Appellant’s brief
• Appelllee’s (Government) brief
• Blog post: Argument preview

United States v. Paul, No. 14-0119/AF (CAAFlog case page)

Issue: Whether the Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals erred when it took judicial notice of an element of a charge in violation of Garner v. Louisiana, 368 U.S. 157 (1961), and Military Rule of Evidence (MRE) 201(c).

Case Links:
• AFCCA opinion
• Appellant’s brief
• Appelllee’s (Government) brief
• Appellant’s reply brief
• Blog post: Argument preview

This week at the ACCA: The Army CCA’s website shows no scheduled oral arguments.

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 next scheduled oral argument at the Navy-Marine Corps CCA’s is on March 13, 2014.

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 on Monday, February 24, 2014:

United States v. Frey, No. 14-0005/AR (CAAFlog case page)

Issue: Whether the Air Force court erred in finding trial counsel’s presentencing argument was harmless error where trial counsel insinuated that appellant will commit future acts of child molestation.

Case Links:
• AFCCA opinion
• Blog post: CAAF to consider an Air Force prosecution sentencing argument
• Appellant’s brief
• Appellee’s (Government) brief
• Appellant’s reply brief
• Blog post: Argument preview

United States v. Flesher, No. 13-0602/AR (CAAFlog case page)

Issue: Whether the military judge abused his discretion when he admitted the testimony of a putative expert witness in violation of the military rules of evidence and case law on bolstering, expert qualifications, relevance, and the appropriate content and scope of expert testimony.

Case Links:
• ACCA opinion (summary affirmation)
• Blog post: A new grant at CAAF
• Appellant’s brief
• Appellee’s (Government) brief
• Blog post: Argument preview

This week at the ACCA: The Army CCA’s website shows no scheduled oral arguments.

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’s website shows no scheduled oral arguments.

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

This week at CAAF: The next scheduled oral argument at CAAF is on February 24, 2014.

This week at the ACCA: The Army CCA will hear oral argument in one case this week, on Thursday, February 20, 2014, at 10:00 a.m.

United States v. Lovell, No. 20111006

Issue: Whether the military judge erroneously granted the government’s causal challenge against panel member Colonel William L. Novakoski.

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’s website shows no scheduled oral arguments (and communication with the Clerk of Court confirmed that the NMCCA has not heard any oral arguments so far this calendar year).

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

This week at CAAF: The next scheduled oral argument at CAAF is on February 24, 2014.

This week at the ACCA: The Army CCA will hear oral argument in one case this week, on Wednesday, February 12, 2014, at 12:05 p.m. This argument will occur at the George Washington University School of Law:

United States v.Semenuik-Hauser, No. 20110976

Issues:
I. Whether the military judge abused his discretion in denying the defense motion for a finding of not guilty for specification [2] of the charge and the additional charge and its specifications where appellant’s confession was uncorroborated and where the government’s case-in-chief contained no evidence of appellant’s importation of drugs onto a military installation in august 2010.
II. Whether the military judge committed plain error by failing to instruct the panel on the limited use of appellant’s wife’s prior inconsistent hearsay statements presented in the government’s rebuttal case and whether it was plain error when the trial counsel referenced those statements during his closing argument.

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’s website shows no scheduled oral arguments (or any indication of any scheduled arguments so far this calendar year).

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

This week at CAAF: The next scheduled oral argument at CAAF is on February 24, 2014.

This week at the ACCA: The Army CCA will hear oral argument in one case this week, on Tuesday, February 4, 2014, at 10 a.m.:

United States v. Moyers, No. 20110975

Issues:
I. Whether the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to sustain a conviction of violating 18 U.S.C. § 2385 (advocating overthrow of government).
II. Whether the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to sustain a conviction of violating 18 U.S.C. § 2387 (activities affecting armed forces generally).

This week at the AFCCA: According to the court’s website, the Air Force CCA will hear oral argument in United States v. Allen on Tuesday, February 4, 2014, at 10 a.m. Not additional information is available on the court’s website.

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’s website shows no scheduled oral arguments (or any indication of any scheduled arguments so far this calendar year).

Significant military justice event this week: As discussed in this post, the next meeting of the Response Systems to Adult Sexual Assault Crimes Panel will occur on Thursday, January 30, at The George Washington University Law School,  beginning at 8:30 a.m.

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 once case this week, on Tuesday, January 28, 2014:

United States v. Janssen, No 14-0130/AF (CAAFlog case page)

Issue: Whether the civilian judge on Appellant’s Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals panel was properly appointed.See U.S. Const. Article II, Section 2, Clause 2; 10 U.S.C. § 113 (2012); 5 U.S.C. § 3101 (2012).

Case Links:
• AFCCA opinion
• AFCCA opinion on reconsideration
Blog post: CAAF to review the AFCCA’s Appointments Clause issue
Appellant’s brief
Appellee’s (Government) first brief
CAAF’s order of January 16, 2014
Blog post: The soybel’s go rolling along
• Blog post: A hard look at the Government brief rejected by CAAF
• Appellee’s (Government) second brief

This week at the ACCA: The Army CCA will hear oral argument in one case this week, on Wednesday, January 29, 2014, at 10 a.m.:

United States v. Turner, No. 20120504

Issues:
I. [Whether t]he evidence is factually and legally insufficient to find appellant guilty of violating a lawful general regulation (the specification of Charge I) because the prohibition against using a cellular phone while driving is meant for phones being used as actual phones, not as music players.
II. [Whether t]he enumerated offense of Article 111, UCMJ, preempts prosecution of the Article 134, UCMJ, offense alleged in specification 2 of Charge III, because Article 111, UCMJ, directly addresses the actions charged under Article 134, UCMJ.

This week at the AFCCA: According to the court’s website, the next scheduled oral argument at the Air Force CCA is on February 4, 2014. However, I’ve been told that the oral argument in the en banc reconsideration of the capital case of United States v. Witt, No. 36785 (discussed in this post), will occur on Tuesday, January 28, 2014. I’ll post any additional information that I receive.

Update: A reader informs me that the AFCCA’s website now shows that the court will hear oral argument in Witt on Tuesday, January 28, 2014, at 10 a.m. Additionally, the court will hear oral argument in United States v. Seton on Wednesday, January 29, 2014, at 10 a.m.

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’s website shows no scheduled oral arguments.

This week at SCOTUS: I’m not aware of any military justice developments at the Supreme Court where, for the first time in a long time, I’m not tracking any cases.

This week at CAAF: The next scheduled oral argument at CAAF is on January 28, 2014.

This week at the ACCA: The Army CCA will hear oral argument in one case this week, on Wednesday, January 22, 2014, at 2 p.m.:

United States v. Castillo, No. 20110935

Issues:
I. Whether the military judge erred in denying the implied bias challenge against LTC DS in light of LTC DS’s professional relationship with the trial counsel, his direct supervisory role over two other members, his personal experience as a sexual assault victim, and the presence of four other panel members who also maintained professional relationships with the trial counsel.
II. Whether the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to sustain a conviction for rape by rendering unconscious where the evidence adduced at trial does not support a finding that the alleged victim was unconscious when the sexual act began.

This week at the AFCCA: According to the court’s website, the next scheduled oral argument at the Air Force CCA is on February 4, 2014. However, I’ve been told that the oral argument in the en banc reconsideration of the capital case of United States v. Witt, No. 36785 (discussed in this post), will occur or January 28, 2014. I’ll post any additional information that I receive.

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’s website shows no scheduled oral arguments.

This week at SCOTUS: SCOTUSblog reports that the Court granted cert in eight cases last week (link to order list). None of them were the two military justice cases I’ve been tracking. I’m not aware of any other military justice developments at the Supreme Court.

This week at CAAF: CAAF will hear oral argument in four cases this week:

Monday, January 13, 2014, at 9:30 a.m.:

United States v. Hornback, No. 13-0442/MC (CAAFlog case page)

Issue: Whether the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals erred in finding no material prejudice to Appellant’s substantial right to a fair trial after it assumed, without deciding, that trial counsel’s actions amounted to misconduct, and whether the military judge’s curative instructions sufficiently addressed the cumulative nature of such conduct as well as any corresponding prejudice in light of the factors identified in United States v. Fletcher, 62 M.J. 175 (C.A.A.F. 2005).

Case Links:
NMCCA opinion
Appellant’s brief
Appellee’s (Government) brief
Blog post: Argument preview

Followed by:

United States v. Elespuru, No. 14-0012/AF (CAAFlog case page)

Issue: Whether Specifications 2 and 3 of Charge I are multiplicious.

Case Links:
AFCCA opinion
Blog post: CAAF grant on multiplicity issue
Appellant’s brief
Appellee’s (Government) brief
Blog post: Argument preview

Tuesday, January 14, 2014, at 9:30 a.m.:

United States v. Kearns, No. 13-0565/AR (CAAFlog case page)

Issue: Whether the evidence was legally sufficient to prove that Appellant had the intent to engage in criminal sexual conduct with KO, a minor, when he facilitated KO’s travel in interstate commerce and was found guilty in Specification 1 of Charge III of violating 18 U.S.C. § 2423(a).

Case Links:
ACCA opinion (72 M.J. 586)
Appellant’s brief
Appellee’s (Government) brief
Blog post: Argument preview

Followed by:

United States v. Gutierrez, No. 14-0009/AR (CAAFlog case page)

Issue: Whether the evidence of stalking was legally sufficient where Appellant was acquitted of rape and the prosecution relied on the evidence of rape to prove stalking.

Case Links:
ACCA opinion (summary affirmation)
Appellant’s brief
Appellee’s (Government) brief
Blog post: Argument previewg

This week at the ACCA: The Army CCA will hear oral argument in one case this week, on Wednesday, January 15, 2014, at 10 a.m.:

United States v. Martin, No. 20110345

Issues:
I. The evidence is legally and factually insufficient to support the finding of guilty for attempted rape in Specification 1 of Charge I and for attempted aggravated sexual contact in Specification 2 of Charge I where the government failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that appellant had the specific intent to commit the offenses.
II. The evidence is legally and factually insufficient to support the findings of guilty for rape in Specification 1 of Charge II and for aggravated sexual contact in Specification 2 of Charge II.
III. The military judge abused his discretion when he admitted, over appellant’s objection, the expert testimony of a breathalyzer specialist to rebut the testimony of appellant’s expert on alcohol, its effects on the human brain and body, and on male physiology.

This week at the AFCCA: The Air Force CCA will hear oral argument in two cases this week: United States v. Yarber on Wednesday, January 15, 2014, at 10 a.m., and United States v. Buford on Thursday, January 16, 2014, also at 10 a.m. No additional information is posted on the CCA’s website.

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’s website shows no scheduled oral arguments.

This week at SCOTUS: I’m not aware of any military justice developments at the Supreme Court, where I’m tracking two cases:

This week at CAAF: The next scheduled oral argument at CAAF is on January 13, 2014.

This week at the ACCA: The Army CCA will hear oral argument in one case this week, on Thursday, January 9, 2014, at 10 a.m.:

United States v. Tauaese, No. 20120176

Issue:
[Whether t]he evidence is legally and factually insufficient to sustain a conviction for any of the thirteen specifications of larceny as the evidence adduced at trial does not support a finding that Credit First National Association owned the money at issue.

This week at the AFCCA: The Air Force CCA’s website shows no scheduled oral arguments. However, the oral argument in the en banc reconsideration of the capital case of United States v. Witt, No. 36785 (discussed in this post), was rescheduled to sometime later this month.

This week at the CGCCA: The Coast Guard CCA will hear oral argument in one case this week, on Thursday, January 9, 2014, at 10 a.m.:

United States v. Corral

Issues:
I. Whether the Military Judge improperly allowed a special agent to offer testimony, which should have been characterized as expert opinion testimony, as lay opinion testimony under M.R.E. 701, which substantially prejudiced the rights of Appellant.
II. Whether the Military Judge erred in denying the defense motion to compel funding for expert consultant.

This week at the NMCCA: The Navy-Marine Corps CCA’s website shows no scheduled oral arguments.