Tuesday, April 21, 2009

CAAF issues new grant

Today's web update of CAAF's daily journal included a grant of this unlikely issue: "WHETHER THE LOWER COURT ERRED WHEN IT HELD THAT APPELLANT'S UTTERANCE OF 'MMMM-MMMM-MMMM' WAS LEGALLY SUFFICIENT TO SUPPORT A CONVICTION FOR INDECENT LANGUAGE." United States v. Green, __ M.J. ___, No. 09-0133/MC (C.A.A.F. Apr. 17, 2009). NMCCA's unpublished opinion in the case is available here. United States v. Green, No. 200800005 (N-M. Ct. Crim. App. Aug. 28, 2008).


Anonymous said...

Wow, what an important issue to resolve. Congress needs to have a little chat with CAAF.

Anonymous said...

It shouldn't have been a caaf case, the cca should have resolved this, no strike that. It shouldn't been on the charge sheet to begin with.


Socrates said...

Did the court reporter spell "MMMM" correctly?

Two M's sounds rather playful and innocent: "MM"

With only three M's, it sounds quite decent: "MMM"

But FOUR M's. Well THAT is obscene! "MMMM" Not in polite company.

Anonymous said...

Ah, the Campbell soup case.