New DJ Entries -- And A New Grant

​"Appeals — Summary Dispositions
 
No. 21-0130/AF. U.S. v. Clayton W. Turner. CCA 39706. On further consideration of the granted issue (81 M.J. __ (C.A.A.F. March 15, 2021)), and in view of United States v. Willman, 81 M.J. __ (C.A.A.F. July 21, 2021), accordingly, it is ordered that the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals is hereby affirmed.
 
No. 21-0135/AF. U.S. v. D'Andre M. Johnson. CCA 39676. On further consideration of the granted issues (81 M.J. __ (C.A.A.F. April 14, 2021)), and in view of United States v. Willman, 81 M.J. __ (C.A.A.F. July 21, 2021), we note that in its sentence appropriateness review, the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals erred in failing to consider additional information about Appellant's post-trial confinement conditions even though Appellant had raised the matter in his clemency response to the convening authority. Appellate courts may "consider affidavits and gather additional facts through a DuBay hearing when doing so is necessary for resolving issues raised by materials in the record." United States v. Jessie, 79 M.J. 437, 444 (C.A.A.F. 2020). In United States v. Tyler, 81 M.J. 108 (C.A.A.F. 2021), we held that either party may comment on properly admitted unsworn victim statements. Therefore, the military judge did not plainly err in permitting trial counsel to present argument based on the victim's unsworn statement. Accordingly, it is ordered that the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed as to findings but reversed as to sentence, and the record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Air Force for further review under Article 66, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 866. Thereafter, Article 67, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 867, shall apply.
 
No. 21-0146/AF. U.S. v. Cory J. Frantz. CCA 39657. On further consideration of the granted issue (81 M.J. __ (C.A.A.F. March 23, 2021)), and in view of United States v. Willman, 81 M.J. __ (C.A.A.F. July 21, 2021), accordingly, it is ordered that the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed.
 
No. 21-0243/AF. U.S. v. Derrick O. Williams. CCA 39746. On further consideration of the granted issue (81 M.J. __ (C.A.A.F. June 25, 2021)), and in view of United States v. Willman, 81 M.J. __ (C.A.A.F. July 21, 2021), accordingly, it is ordered that the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed.
 
Order Granting Petition for Review
 
No. 21-0216/NA. U.S. v. Joseph R. Nelson. CCA 201900239. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is granted on the following issue:
 
ARTICLE 31(d), UCMJ REQUIRES SUPPRESSION OF STATEMENTS TAKEN IN VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 31(b). AFTER THE MILITARY JUDGE DETERMINED THAT NCIS AGENTS VIOLATED ARTICLE 31(b) BECAUSE THEIR RIGHTS ADVISEMENT DID NOT PROPERLY ORIENT APPELLANT TO THE NATURE OF THE SUSPECTED MISCONDUCT, DID THE MILITARY JUDGE ERR BY ONLY SUPPRESSING THE STATEMENT AS IT RELATED TO ONE SPECIFIC OFFENSE, BUT THEN ALLOWING THE EVIDENCE TO BE ADMITTED FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE OFFENSES?
 
Briefs will be filed under Rule 25."