I. WHETHER THE AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS ERRED IN HOLDING THAT APPELLANT HAD NO REASONABLE EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY IN HIS GOVERNMENT COMPUTER DESPITE THIS COURT'S RULING IN UNITED STATES v. LONG, 64 M.J. 57 (C.A.A.F. 2006)
II. WHETHER APPELLANT WAS DENIED THE EFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL GUARANTEED BY THE SIXTH AMENDMENT AND ARTICLE 27, UCMJ, WHEN HIS CIVILIAN DEFENSE COUNSEL, IN HIS OPENING STATEMENT, DURING FINDINGS, AND AGAIN IN CLOSING ARGUMENT, CONCEDED APPELLANT'S GUILT TO VARIOUS CHARGES AND SPECIFICATIONS.
Thursday, May 03, 2007
It looks like CAAF won't be having a going-out-of-business sale after all. Today it granted review of two issues in United States v. Larson, No. 07-0263/AF:
Posted by Dwight Sullivan at 12:27 PM