A delayed entry 29 December 2020—a summary of a bit more than a week.
Sorry, cannot resist a FB lawyer joke I received on Xmas Eve--
Other humour not in uniform.
No this is not about the election or politics it is a reminder to us all that editing, and proofreading can be impertinent.
“A lawyer who filed a lawsuit challenging Georgia’s election process is attracting attention because of a typo near the end of the complaint.
The verification paragraph said the lawyer verifies “under plentyof perjury” that the facts in the suit are true and correct. The phrase should read “under penalty of perjury.”
HIGH COURT OF DENMARK
In the ‘we are not alone’ category, the High Court affirmed the findings and increased the sentence of a senior officer.
The High Court found that the defendant was guilty of having tried to abuse his position to get his then-girlfriend and later spouse admitted to a highly coveted leadership training within the Armed Forces. He was also found guilty of attempting to abuse his position by trying to persuade a colonel to hire his girlfriend in a vacant position as a major. In addition, the defendant was found guilty of gross negligence and breach of his duty of confidentiality by giving the girlfriend access to the inbox of the defendant's official e-mail and by forwarding emails of a confidential nature to her on matters that did not concern her.
To show the risks of appeal in some countries, the High Court increasedthe confinement from three to four months.
No. 21-0030/AF. U.S. v. Kalab D. Willman. CCA 39642. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is granted on the following issue:
WHETHER THE LOWER COURT ERRED WHEN IT RULED THAT IT COULD NOT CONSIDER EVIDENCE OUTSIDE THE RECORD TO DETERMINE SENTENCE APPROPRIATENESS UNDER ARTICLE 66(c).
WHETHER THE CONVENING AUTHORITY'S FAILURE TO TAKE ACTION ON THE SENTENCE DEPRIVED THE ARMY COURT OF JURISDICTION UNDER ARTICLE 66, UCMJ.
No. 21-0062/AR. U.S. v. Fernando Quinones-Colon, Jr. CCA 20200093. See alsoNo. 21-0040/AR. U.S. v. Leshan Jones. CCA 20190254; No. 20-0358/AR. U.S. v. Carlos Muniz, Jr; No. 20-0345/AR. U.S. v. Jacob L. Brubaker-Escobar. CCA 20190618, all on the same issue. More in the pipeline from ACCA.
Looks like the ACCA website has been redesigned and reorganized? They now have a page for summary affirmances and a “Appellate Library.” It looks as if the Library page is where briefs will be found. ACCA had earlier announced it would start posting briefs as does the CGCCA and does CAAF in granted cases. They now list “short form affirmances” in a separate list (in the past we have had to assume summary affirmance on cases with no written opinion).
IN THE NEWS—PENDING APPELLATE CASES
Military Justice Editor
CAAFlog 1.0 Archive
-Current Term Opinions
Joint R. App. Pro.
Global MJ Reform
LOC Mil. Law Resources