Wednesday, March 21, 2007

If Leonard is the most important CAAF case of the century, is Young the least important?

CAAF's docket has been extremely light this term. According to the CAAF web site's scheduled hearings page, CAAF has heard 46 oral arguments so far this term. Another 10 are scheduled in April and May. So it looks like the total case output for the term will be 57 -- the 56 orally argued cases plus United States v. Canchola, 64 M.J. 245 (C.A.A.F. 2007) (per curiam).

How did United States v. Young, __ M.J. ___, No. 06-0505/AR (C.A.A.F. March 21, 2007), make the list of the 57 most important military justice cases of the year?

The principal issue in Young appears to be whether the evidence is legally sufficient where massive amounts of circumstantial evidence demonstrates the accused's guilt. Uhm, yeah. There is also an issue about whether the government presented sufficient evidence that Young possessed some amount of marijuana he didn't also distribute, thus supporting findings of guilty to both a distribution spec and a possession with intent to distribute spec. Again, in an analysis applying the facts to settled law, CAAF says the government presented adequate evidence to support both specs. Finally, CAAF denies relief for post-trial delay of 1,637 days (four years, five months, and twenty-five days) between trial and the CCA's ruling. (Suppressed yawn.)

If CAAF granted review in Young, what must the issues look like in the petitions it denies?

No comments: