tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34853720.post2203105613114142144..comments2023-08-24T10:39:23.460-04:00Comments on CAAFlog: Grants galoreDwight Sullivanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11657981110237418710noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34853720.post-46242630876425304812009-01-27T17:39:00.000-05:002009-01-27T17:39:00.000-05:00And in the Diamond case which was published in the...And in the Diamond case which was published in the MJ's, ACCA held that the issue that CAAF summarily remanded on, was "without merit."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34853720.post-43925848590824130952009-01-27T12:19:00.000-05:002009-01-27T12:19:00.000-05:00I guess the Govt would have been better served if ...I guess the Govt would have been better served if the CA just disapproved the Dismissal, and suspended all other punishment. However, we could have still ended up at CAAF by way of Art. 69.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34853720.post-61871085463864685082009-01-27T08:31:00.000-05:002009-01-27T08:31:00.000-05:00"ACCAs opinon does not appear to avaiable online."..."ACCAs opinon does not appear to avaiable online." Of course not. They decide the majority of thier case in "unpublished" opinions. That means that they dont want people to see them or use them as precedent. They would prefer that everyone guess why CAAF sets aside thier opinions.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com