CAAF denied this petition last week: No. 20-0250/AR. U.S. v. Edward Garner. CCA 20180563. The prior week the court denied "Appellant's motion to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review out of time is denied."
Thus, it appears an accused has been denied CAAF review without the benefit of a brief, all because defense counsel failed to file a brief in time. While we cannot be sure, the lower court opinion indicates this was not a merits case and had live issues (perhaps some Grostefon). Recall that U.S. v. Jason A. Scott was another Army case where a brief was not filed after repeated requests by CAAF.
This raises a number of interesting issues to consider.
1. What legal recourse does the accused have to continue pursuing appellate review of the case? Where will he/she/they sue, if anywhere?
2. These are examples of potential professional misconduct. Negligent representation in litigation is said to be the largest category of bar complaints in civilian practice (with immigration cases taking up the largest share of that category). What mechanisms are in place--and actually functioning--to report and address professional misconduct in the MJ system?
CAAFlog 1.0 Archive
-Current Term Opinions
Joint R. App. Pro.
Global MJ Reform
LOC Mil. Law Resources