WHETHER THE ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS ERRED IN AFFIRMING APPELLANT'S CONVICTION FOR RAPE WHEN THE MILITARY JUDGE EXCEPTED "ON DIVERS OCCASIONS" FROM THE SPECIFICATION AND DID NOT SPECIFY THE SINGLE OCCASION AS PART OF THE FINDING, BUT THE VICTIM ONLY TESTIFIED TO A SINGLE OCCURRENCE AND THE PARTIES ONLY ARGUED THIS SINGLE OCCASION TO THE MILITARY JUDGE.I can't find ACCA's opinion online.
The other four grants are all in naval cases. On 28 April, CAAF will hear oral argument in United States v. Mazza, No. 09-0032/NA. The issue there is: "WHETHER THE CIVILIAN DEFENSE COUNSEL WAS INEFFECTIVE BY: (1) SOLICITING HUMAN LIE DETECTOR TESTIMONY, (2) FAILING TO OBJECT TO ADMISSION OF THE VICTIM'S VIDEOTAPED INTERVIEW, AND (3) PERMITTING THE VIDEOTAPE TO BE VIEWED DURING DELIBERATIONS." I found a 2005 NMCCA opinion in the case sending the case back for a rehearing, but I couldn't find a later NMCCA opinion. Does anyone have a copy?
The other case set for 28 April is United States v. Bush, No. 09-0119/MC, with two granted issues:
WHETHER THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS' INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION OF THIS COURT'S DECISION IN UNITED STATES v. ALLENDE, 66 M.J. 142 (C.A.A.F. 2008) PLACES IT AT ODDS WITH THIS COURT'S DECISION IN UNITED STATES v. GINN, 47 M.J. 236 (C.A.A.F. 1997).NMCCA's opinion is published at 67 M.J. 508. We previously discussed it (at ridiculous length) here and here.
WHETHER THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS MISINTERPRETED ALLENDE, CREATING THE PRACTICAL RESULT OF SHIFTING TO AN APPELLANT THE BURDEN OF PROVING THAT A CONSTITUTIONAL ERROR WAS HARMFUL.
Today's other two grants were by the special Hall of Fame panel considering two convictions arising from the infamous February 1998 aviation mishap at Cavalese, Italy that killed 20 civilians. For reasons that will be immediately obvious to the No Man, I'm going to be offline until, oh, a bit after 2300. I'll post on the Schweitzer and Ashby grants then.