.jpg)
My stay in the Pearl of the Antilles was longer than I expected. (Those of you who know what I do for a living and who subscribe to a newspaper or own a television set probably already know why.) But I'm back.
In Saturday's post, the No Man discussed ACCA's Etibek decision. ACCA's web site includes Etibek in its "Published Army Opinions" file, but Etibek, which is labeled a Memorandum Opinion, sure doesn't look like a published opinion. Perhaps it was uploaded into the wrong location.
In other military justice news, CAAF has released the schedule for its 2007 Judicial Conference, which will be held on 16 and 17 May at Catholic University's law school. I'll be speaking about extraordinary writs the second day. The title of my lecture will be: Military writ practice: What still glitters after Goldsmith?
Military justice blogs are to blogs as military music is to music. The views expressed on this blog are offered in the contributors' personal capacity. They do not purport to be speaking for, and their views should not be imputed to, any other organization, agency, or entity.
Military justice research links
- 2008 Military Judges' Benchbook web site
- AFMAN 51-203, Records of Trial (1 Oct 1999)
- AFPD 51-2, Administration of Military Justice (7 Sep 1993)
- Air Force Instruction 51-201, Administration of Military Justice (21 Dec 07)
- Air Force Rules of Professional Conduct
- AR 27-10, Military Justice (16 Nov 2005)
- AR 27-26, Rules of Professional Conduct for Lawyers (1 May 1992)
- COMDTINST M5810.1D, Military Justice Manual (17 Aug 2000)
- Congressional Research Service, Statutory Interpretation: General Principles and Trends (March 30, 2006 ed.)
- Congressional Research Service, The Constitution of the United States of America, Analysis and Interpretation: Analysis of Cases Decided by the Supreme Court of the United States (2002) with 2006 supplement
- JAGINST 5803.1C, Professional Conduct of Attorneys Practicing Under the Cognizance and Supervision of the Judge Advocate General (9 Nov 04)
- JAGINST 5810.2A, Military Justice Regulations (17 Sep 93)
- JAGMAN, JAGINST 5800.7E (20 Jun 07)
- Law Library Microform Consortium, Military Law Collection
- LOC military law collection
- Manual for Courts-Martial (2008 ed.)
- Manual for Courts-Martial, United States (2005 ed.)
- Manual of the Judge Advocate General (JAGMAN), JAGINST 5800.7E (20 Jun 2007)
- Military Justice, Army Regulation 27-10 (16 Nov 2005)
- UCMJ (as of 28 Jan 2008)
Links
- ACCA's web site
- AFCCA's web site
- AIr Force Judge Advocate General's School's web site
- Air Force Law Review
- Army Lawyer
- Army Trial Judiciary's docket
- CAAF's web site
- CAAFlog.com
- CGCCA's web site
- Coast Guard trial and appellate dockets
- Court-Martial Trial Practice blog
- JAA American Inn of Court's web site
- JAA's web site
- JAG LAW Blog
- JAG Magazine [Navy]
- Journal of Military and Veteran Law
- Military Law Review
- Naval Law Review
- NIMJ's web site
- NJS's web site
- NMCCA's web site
- SCOTUSblog (aka, the greatest blog on the planet)
- Supreme Court's web site
- The Reporter [Air Force]
- This Court-Martial Sentences You To . . . [blog]
- TJAGLCS's web site
Blog archive
-
▼
2007
(657)
-
▼
April
(50)
- Troubling new ACCA decision
- All good things come to those who wait 64 days
- Counter update
- SCOTUS shutout
- Which do you want first, the good news or the bad ...
- Paxton: Nothing New
- Long shot misses the target
- Amicus Granted for writ appeal
- The counter
- Oral Argument in United States v. Wilson
- Two more cases
- Palenius's Platitude
- Three New CAAF Decisions
- CAAF doesn't take petitions for granted
- Supremes deny cert in New
- The counter
- Long shot
- New published CGCCA decision
- The numbers climb like the Dow Jones Industrial Av...
- New CAAFlog contributor
- Court-martial rate plummets
- The counter
- MCM Changes
- UCMJ Jurisdiction over Government Contractors
- Stuck on 50
- Hitting the half century mark
- Diaz denied
- New v. Gates: certworthy?
- Proposed CAAF Rules changes
- Upcoming Code Committee meeting
- The Counter
- Intriguing lecture
- Two new published CCA opinions
- What if they held a C.A.A.F. and nobody came?
- To paraphrase Lincoln, sometimes it is better to r...
- Non-resource alert: Army Lawyer Jan. 2007 Ed.
- Dearing Saga is Over . . .?
- CAAF rejects writ appeal challenging really ugly C...
- CCA opinion accessibility
- Supply and demand
- New conference docketed
- Taylor is a privilege to read
- New CAAF opinion is out
- Government PETITION for grant of review?
- CAAF petitioners 0-for-March
- Another stealth published opinion
- Doctoring a members panel
- CAAFlog South Asia, Si?
- Art. 32 IO Recommends Dismissal of Charges Against...
- While I was away . . .
-
▼
April
(50)
Labels
- Admin (14)
- Architecture (2)
- Art. 2a10 (27)
- Article 125 (1)
- CAAF docket (41)
- CAAF grants (28)
- CAAF judges (2)
- CAAF oral argument audio (11)
- Capital courts-martial (46)
- CCAs (32)
- CLE/Events (13)
- collateral review (4)
- Court-martial news (69)
- habeas (5)
- MEJA (31)
- Military commissions (5)
- Military justice legislation (19)
- Military justice reform (18)
- MilJus Scholarship (22)
- New Article 120 (8)
- New CAAF opinions (40)
- New CCA opinions (47)
- Rants (9)
- SCOTUS MilJus Cases (64)
- TWIMJ (39)
- US SOFAs (16)
Contributors
Our contact information
You can reach us by email at:
caaflog@caaflog.com
caaflog@caaflog.com
Posts
4 comments:
The scope of the CAAF's writ power was affected by Goldsmith? Maybe somebody should have told the court. Hopefully, the reconfigured court will adhere to its statutory jurisdiction.
But aren't even chimps entitled to the common law writs of habeas and de homine repligiando (see 37 Golden Gate U.L. Rev. 219)? I know some of our military appellants may not be quite so smart or cute, but I'm not particularly upset that CAAF or the CCAs will still give some opportunity to have their claims heard. Is there any particular post-Goldsmith case that you have in mind?
Also while you were away, sir, the 32 came back in the Air Force Officers vs. Blackwater case out of Afghanistan:
http://content.hamptonroads.com/story.cfm?story=122138&ran=114488
Well, Anonymous, off the top of my head I guess I would question how issuing writs regarding appointment of counsel for Supreme Court cert petitions falls within CAAF's jurisdiction post-Goldsmith. Someone's going to have to explain to me how such a writ protects CAAF's jurisdiction when CAAF has already decided the case.
Post a Comment