.jpg)
Wednesday, July 11, 2007
SG passes on Taylor
The SG has waived his right to respond to the cert petition in Taylor, No. 07-13, which we previously discussed here.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
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)
-
▼
July
(52)
- Murphy writ explained
- All Moreno, all the time
- More Moreno
- H.R. 3174 is finally on Thomas
- Blue and silver replaces burgandy and gold
- CAAF grants voir dire issue
- Interesting (and weird) 10th Circuit opinion on co...
- H.R. 3174 watch
- U.S. district court rejects Loving's FOIA suit
- ACCA rules a lab report is testimonial hearsay for...
- CAAF grants review of indecent assault/controlled ...
- New NMCCA published opinion on communicating a threat
- Link to pdf of H.R. 3174
- BZ for H.R. 3174!
- Representative Davis's floor statement
- Text of the Equal Justice for Our Military Act, H....
- Military justice cert reform bill introduced
- CA ya later?
- The Military Justice Doldrums...
- All things reconsidered
- Major Writ
- More Article 2 analysis
- Going downee ocean, hon
- Murphy's law
- Article 2 article
- A provocative take on Pena
- Webb of deceit
- Color bind
- Resource alert
- New designation
- Is the fix in?
- Taylor docketed for conference
- Sea services opinions
- JCTG issus second published opinion in one week: ...
- A new published NMCCA opinion: Larry Holmes comes...
- Star light, star bright, third star I see tonight ...
- Hunter Grant
- CAAF Grants USCG "Rescue Mission" Case
- To paraphrase the Rollings Stones, come on down [t...
- Sacramentum discusses new Coast Guard case on term...
- SG passes on Taylor
- You can't hide your lyin' eyes
- Military justice legislation
- Resource Alert
- HUGE news!!!
- Taylor QP and a mea culpa
- The 2007 term
- The privilege of seeking cert
- To quote the Hollies, "It's over, well over"
- Jackson v. Virginia -- not as worthless as I thought
- New CGCCA decision
- The JAA web site has terminated its unauthorized a...
-
▼
July
(52)
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
3 comments:
Anyone know what this means? Options: The SG has no answer; does not care; and/or, relies on the SCT's deference to CAAFactivism? Or all of the above.
My best guess is that it means that the SG thinks there is little chance of cert being granted and therefore doesn't want to waste resources drafting a response, knowing that if there is any interest by the Court, the Court will ask for a response. Because privileges in military law are by rule, as opposed to the common-law process of the federal rules, I'm guessing the SG sees little likelihood that Taylor has application any broader than court-martial practice and therefore is a poor vehicle for review by the Court.
A quick review of Stern's Supreme Court Practice suggests that Mr. O'Connor is correct. The case is unlikely to be reviewed by the Court and the SG, who now works in Mr. Stern's old office, knows it.
Post a Comment