In the future, when commenting on any Daily Journal entry that is relevant to interpreting CAAF's rules, I will highlight relevant sections of the CAAF Rules Guide that discusses the issue (I recently joined as a co-editor). These will be called "Rules Notes."
Today, consider the following interesting entry, which indicates that the Army TJAG withdrew certification of an issue.
From last week:
No. 20-0325/AR. United States, Appellant. v. Dashaun K. Henry, Appellee. CCA 20190688. Appellant's motion to withdraw the certificate for review without prejudice is granted.
Here is what was certified:
Wednesday, July 22, 2020
Certificate for Review Filed
No. 20-0325/AR. United States, Appellant v. Dashaun K. Henry, Appellee. CCA 20190688. Notice is given that a certificate for review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals and supporting brief were filed under Rule 22 on this date.
DID THE MILITARY JUDGE ABUSE HIS DISCRETION IN EXLUDING [sic] THE FOUR STATEMENTS ON WHICH THE PROSECUTION SOUGHT INTERLOCUTORY APPELLATE REVIEW, PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 62, UCMJ.
If one peruses § 22.03 of the Rules Guide, one finds no reference to a prior withdrawal of a certification. Has anyone heard of this happening before--and why?
CAAFlog 1.0 Archive
-Current Term Opinions
Joint R. App. Pro.
Global MJ Reform
LOC Mil. Law Resources