This week at SCOTUS: The Court has scheduled oral argument in Briggs for March 23, 2020. I’m not aware of any other military justice developments at the Supreme Court, where I’m tracking five cases:
- United States v. Briggs, No. 19-108 (consolidated) (cert granted on Nov. 15; gov’t brief filed Jan. 6)
- Richards v. Donovan, et al., No. 19-55 (pet. filed Jun. 8; resp. req. Aug. 14, due. Mar. 23)
- McDonald v. United States, No. 19-557 (pet filed Oct. 28; resp. req. Nov. 21, resp. due Feb. 21)
- Kelly v. United States, No. 19A645 (ext. of time to file cert. pet. granted to Feb. 13)
- Voorhees v. United States, No. 19-796 (pet. filed. Dec. 20; ext. req. to Feb. 20)
This week at CAAF: The next scheduled oral arguments at CAAF are on February 11, 2020.
This week at the ACCA: The next scheduled oral argument at the Army CCA is on February 13, 2020.
This week at the AFCCA: The Air Force CCA will hear oral argument in United States v. Painter, No. 39646, on Wednesday, February 5, 2020, at noon at the George Washington University Law School. No additional information is available on the CCA’s website.
This week at the CGCCA: The Coast Guard CCA’s website shows no scheduled oral arguments.
This week at the NMCCA: The Navy-Marine Corps CCA will hear oral argument in one case this week, on Thursday, February 6, 2020, at 10 a.m.:
United States v. Simpson, No. 201800268
I. To convict under Article 120c(a)(3), must the Government prove the attendant circumstances of both an indecent viewing under Article 120c(a)(1) and an indecent recording under Article 120c(a)(2)?
II. Whether one who causes another to deliver an indecent visual recording to oneself may providently plead guilty to distribution of that same indecent visual recording under Articles 77 and 120c(a)(3) in light of United States v. Hill, 25 M.J. 411 (C.M.A. 1988)?
III. Given the Government’s charging theory, were Appellant’s guilty pleas to Charge I, Specifications 2 and 3 provident when his alleged co-conspirator was not subject to the UCMJ?