CAAFlog
  • Home

CAAFlog

A Brief Examination of Air Force Courts-Martial Data and Experience

11/30/2020

4 Comments

 
​ In light of the responses to the recent Task and Purpose article, I thought a look at court-martial numbers and experience in the Air Force might be appropriate. The data comes from the annual reports available on the CAAF website and on the Joint Service Committee on Military Justice’s website and my review of official biographies.

Read More
4 Comments

Fidell's Reflections

11/28/2020

0 Comments

 
0 Comments

Maurer on Larrabee

11/28/2020

5 Comments

 
the_larrabee_decision_is_a_missed_opportunity_for_the_court_and_for_the_government.pdf
File Size: 275 kb
File Type: pdf
Download File

Dan Maurer

MJ Editor

5 Comments

Updated: On the Air Force JAG Corps

11/27/2020

15 Comments

 
Friends of CAAFlog Prof. Rachel VanLandingham, Prof. Joshua Kastenberg, and Don Christensen weigh in here: https://taskandpurpose.com/news/william-cooley-air-force-sexual-assault

Their main criticism is that the regular rotation from job to job prevents the development of expertise in criminal litigation.

Update: A response from Gregory Speirs here.

Editor's note:
There can be no doubt--these people are experts. Prof. Dunlap should explain his repeated use of scare quotes around that word, which is a departure from norms of academic civility. 


15 Comments

The Government Fails to Clear the Low Bar of United States v Carter in United States v. White

11/25/2020

1 Comment

 
On Nov 9, the CAAF reversed the NMCCA in United States v. White.  Judge Maggs delivered the unanimous opinion of the Court.
White opinion here.

Read More
1 Comment

Recent AFCCA Opinion: United States v. Shouey

11/24/2020

0 Comments

 
The AFCCA affirmed the findings and sentence of Airman First Class Jenna E. Shouey, finding no error materially prejudicial.  

Shouey opinion here

Read More
0 Comments

Reply Filed in Bergdahl Case

11/23/2020

1 Comment

 
Counsel for SGT Bergdahl filed this reply today in his ACCA coram nobis case:
bergdahl-misc20200588-coram_nobis_reply__231120_.pdf
File Size: 6028 kb
File Type: pdf
Download File

1 Comment

Recent AFCCA Opinion: United States v. Johnson

11/23/2020

0 Comments

 
The AFCCA affirmed the findings and sentence of Second Lieutenant D'Andre M. Johnson, finding no error materially prejudicial to his substantial rights.

Johnson opinion here.


Read More
0 Comments

Recent NMCCA Opinion: United States v. Quezada

11/23/2020

0 Comments

 
​The NMCCA  affirmed the findings and sentence of Lance Corporal Jonathan Quezada, finding  no material prejudice to his case. 
 ​
Quezada opinion here.

Read More
0 Comments

Fissell on Larrabee

11/23/2020

2 Comments

 
My thoughts:

Practically: Not so important. There are very few retiree cases.

Symbolically: Hugely important. Larrabee shows that the talismanic invocation of "good order and discipline," absent a rational underpinning, is insufficient to decide the limits of military jurisdiction--even if Congress is the institution invoking it. The judiciary's response: "Please!"

We will be sure to watch the inevitable appeal and keep readers updated on its status.

Brenner Fissell

EIC

2 Comments

Analysis: Larrabee v. Braithwaite

11/23/2020

0 Comments

 
U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia limits Congress’s provision of court-martial jurisdiction over military retirees
 
Larrabee v. Braithwaite, No. 19-654-RJL (D.D.C.)
 
            In a consequential memorandum opinion issued on Friday, Judge Richard J. Leon of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that Congress’s grant of court-martial jurisdiction over military retirees in the Fleet Marine Corps Reserve for offenses committed after their retirement is unconstitutional.  While the Court did not explicitly determine that court-martial jurisdiction over all military retirees is per se unconstitutional, the practical reach of the Court’s decision is likely to significantly curtail such jurisdiction over retirees for crimes committed after their retirement from active-duty service.

Read More
0 Comments

DC District Court Holds That Court-Martial Jurisdiction Over Retirees Is Unconstitutional

11/20/2020

5 Comments

 
Analysis forthcoming.
04518178469.pdf
File Size: 1011 kb
File Type: pdf
Download File

5 Comments

Amicus Filed in Support of Bergdahl

11/20/2020

0 Comments

 
Yesterday, November 19, 2020, Professors Joshua Kastenberg and Rachel Vanlandingham filed a brief with ACCA in support of Bergdahl. 

Elizabeth M. Berecin

Managing Editor

0 Comments

D.C. Circuit hears argument in drone case.

11/20/2020

0 Comments

 
On Monday, the D.C. Circuit conducted a nearly hour long oral argument in the case of Kareem v. Haspel, a case that asks whether an American citizen has the right to know whether they are being targeted for assassination, when the government claims that fact is secret.

​Judge Patricia Millett expressed a great deal of concern that the Justice Department's argument would effectively mean that the government could assassination anyone, anywhere in the world, at its discretion. Judge Karen Henderson, by contrast, was skeptical of Kareem's claims, calling his fear of being the target of a drone strike a "spectacular delusion of some sort of grandeur." The outcome of the case is likely therefore to come down to Judge Sri Srinavasan, who served as Deputy Solicitor General early in the Obama Administration.

Michel Paradis

LOAC Editor

0 Comments

New Editors

11/20/2020

3 Comments

 
CAAFlog continues to expand. Today we are pleased to announce four new editors.
  • Elizabeth Berecin, formerly a research fellow, has now passed the bar exam and will be Managing Editor.  Elizabeth was instrumental in re-booting CAAFlog 2.0, and will be entering the Army JAG Corps early next year.
  • LTC Dan Maurer, assistant professor of law at the United States Military Academy, has joined as a Military Justice Editor. Dan is one of the deepest thinkers about military justice today, with a book forthcoming from Oxford University Press. 
  • Jeffrey Coyle, associate at Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, has joined as the Article III Editor. Jeff is a former surface warfare officer in the Navy, and clerked at both the Ninth Circuit and SDNY. He will draw on this experience to comment on military justice cases in federal court (often on habeas). 
  • William Black, an attorney at the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation, has joined as the Criminal Investigations Editor. Bill spent his pre-law school life as a military police officer and investigator in the Air Force, and will bring the unique experience of an investigator-turned-lawyer to CAAFlog. 

Brenner Fissell

EIC

3 Comments

Up Periscope

11/20/2020

0 Comments

 
UP PERISCOPE
 
Dateline: 20 November 2020 (as of 1000); a summary of the week’s events.
 
SUPREME COURT
 
FEDERAL COURTS
 
  • 11th Cir. Case has a textbook Rule 704(b) violation, reports evidence guru Prof. Colin Miller. He notes,
 
The recent opinion of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit in United States v. Boykins, 2020 WL 6441103 (11th Cir. 2020), provides a good example of testimony that violates Rule 704(b).
            In Boykins, Jarrett Boykins was charged with two counts of possession of methamphetamine with intent to distribute and five related gun counts. At trial, 
            Officer John Walker, a member of the Birmingham Police Department and the Drug Task Force, testified as an expert witness for the government at trial. His direct examination included the following exchange:
 
                        Q. “Based on your training and experience and the evidence that you reviewed in relation to the Pleasant Grove case, do you believe that the 50-plus grams or more methamphetamine was possessed with the intent to distribute it?”
 
                        A. “Yes, sir, absolutely.”
 
                        Q. “In relation to the Homewood case, the 152 pills...do you believe that that quantity, in relation to the quantity that was possessed was possessed with the intent to distribute?”
 
                        A. “Yes, sir.”
 
When Boykins appealed his conviction and challenged this line of questioning, the State didn't even defend it; instead, as the Eleventh Circuit noted, "The government appears to concede, and we agree, that this testimony by Officer Walker violated Rule 704(b)....The question is whether this error satisfies the remaining prongs of plain error [because he did not object to the questioning]." (Emphasis added.)

Read More
0 Comments

Recent NMCCA Opinion:United States v. Kangha

11/19/2020

0 Comments

 
The NMCCA affirmed the findings and sentence of Electrician's Mate Fireman Recruit Kondali A. Kangha, finding no prejudicial error.

Kangha opinion here.

Read More
0 Comments

Recent AFCCA Opinion: United States v. Hernandez

11/19/2020

0 Comments

 
The AFCCA set aside Airman Basic Robert J. Hernandez's findings of guilt and sentence, remanding his case to the convening authority for a rehearing or a dismissal. ​

Hernandez opinion here

Read More
0 Comments

Willenbring Appeals ACCA's 2001 Opinion

11/19/2020

1 Comment

 
On Monday, November 16, 2020, SSGT Willenbring filed a petition for extraordinary relief with CAAF. Note, this appeal comes almost nineteen years after ACCA's opinion.  

​"No. 21-0056/AR. Charles G. Willenbring, Appellant v. Secretary of the Army, Ryan D. Mitchell, et al., United States Army, Appellee and United States, Real Party in Interest. CCA 20200430. Notice is given that a writ-appeal petition for review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals on application for extraordinary relief was filed under Rule 27(b) on this date."

Elizabeth Berecin

Research Fellow

1 Comment

CAAF Grants Review in United States v. Muniz

11/18/2020

0 Comments

 
​"No. 20-0358/AR. U.S. v. Carlos Muniz, Jr. CCA 20200092. 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 granted on the following specified issue:
 
WHETHER THE CONVENING AUTHORITY'S FAILURE TO TAKE ACTION ON THE SENTENCE DEPRIVED THE ARMY COURT OF JURISDICTION UNDER ARTICLE 66, UCMJ.
 
No briefs will be filed under Rule 25."

Elizabeth Berecin

Research Fellow

0 Comments

Recent ACCA Opinion: United States v. Tate

11/18/2020

0 Comments

 
ACCA set aside the sentence of Staff Sergeant David C. Tate, instructing that the convening authority may direct a rehearing under R.C.M. 1103(f)(2). ​

Tate opinion here.

Read More
0 Comments

Recent AFCCA Opinion: United States v. Morrow

11/18/2020

4 Comments

 
The AFCCA set aside the findings of guilt and sentence of CPT Anthony R. Morrow, finding the conviction to be legally and factually insufficient. 

Morrow opinion here.

Editor's Note: The Air Force court should be commended for this scholarly discussion of dis-con law, and for its enlightened decision. It is not a crime for a police officer to dislike you; it is not a crime to be a "smart aleck." That anyone thought it was appropriate to deprive a human being of two months of his life for this is absurd.

Read More
4 Comments

CAAF Preview: United States v. Chandler.

11/17/2020

4 Comments

 
​CAAF will hear oral arguments in United States v. Chandler, a case, whose issue was certified by The Judge Advocate General of the Air Force. TJAG puts forth this assignment of error to CAAF:  
 
THE STAFF JUDGE ADVOCATE NEGOTIATED THE INCLUSION OF AGGRAVATING EVIDENCE IN A STIPULATION OF FACT. OVER DEFENSE’S OBJECTION, AND AFTER DISPUTING THE DEFENSE’S VERSION OF EVENTS, THE STAFF JUDGE ADVOCATE PROVIDED POST-TRIAL ADVICE TO THE CONVENING AUTHORITY. DID THE STAFF JUDGE ADVOCATE’S PRETRIAL CONDUCT WARRANT DISQUALIFICATION?
 
CAAF Briefs here.

Read More
4 Comments

Army GAD's Answer in Bergdahl Coram Nobis

11/17/2020

1 Comment

 
"Petitioner offers no explanation for waiting to request the military judge’s application materials until the day the CAAF affirmed this court’s judgment, nearly two years after the military judge’s appointment with the EOIR was announced. Had petitioner exercised reasonable diligence prior to this court’s and/or the CAAF’s opinions, he could have discovered and raised the information concerning the military judge during the ordinary course of appeal."
bergdahl-misc_20200588-answer_to_the_petition_for_a_writ_of_coram_nobis-_201116_.pdf
File Size: 16525 kb
File Type: pdf
Download File

1 Comment

CAAF Preview: United States v. Ayala

11/17/2020

0 Comments

 
​On Wednesday November 18, 2020, CAAF will hear oral arguments in United States v. Ayala.  
 
The granted issue is: WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE ABUSED HIS DISCRETION IN ADMITTING THE VICTIM’S PRIOR CONSISTENT STATEMENTS UNDER MIL. R. EVID. 801(d)(1)(B)(i) and 801(d)(1)(B)(ii)?
 
CAAF briefs here.

Read More
0 Comments
<<Previous
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Links
    CAAF
    -Daily Journal
    -Current Term Opinions
    ACCA
    AFCCA
    CGCCA
    NMCCA
    Joint R. App. Pro.
    Global MJ Reform
    LOC Mil. Law
    Army Lawyer
    Resources

    Categories

    All
    Daily Journal
    MJ Reform
    Question Time
    Scholarship
    Top Of The Year 2021
    Unanimous
    Week In Review

    Archives

    April 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    November 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020

The views expressed on this website are expressed in the authors' personal capacities.
Proudly powered by Weebly
  • Home