tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34853720.post7831753339243559662..comments2023-08-24T10:39:23.460-04:00Comments on CAAFlog: New published Coast Guard Court decisionDwight Sullivanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11657981110237418710noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34853720.post-66728912540426249372007-10-14T23:01:00.000-04:002007-10-14T23:01:00.000-04:00No military justice minds ever gave much weight to...No military justice minds ever gave much weight to Coast Guard court decisions, this decision does not change that trend.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34853720.post-28872709427971966562007-10-12T11:10:00.000-04:002007-10-12T11:10:00.000-04:00I don't know what the odds of certification are, b...I don't know what the odds of certification are, but it seems like a bad idea to me. Frankly, I think the CCA got it right on the uncharged misconduct and providence issues, and also in its ultimate conclusion that the CA needed to review the clemency materials again (or at least indicate somewhere that he considered them).<BR/><BR/>But to me, the biggest issue in this case is one you don't mention: the notion that a CCA can, at an accused's election, resolve a CA's failure to consider clemency materials without a remand by considering the clemency materials, and the CA's failure to take them into account, in making its sentence appropriateness determination. That notion seems quite flawed to me, as sentence appropriateness and clemency are two separate inquiries that should not be conflated.<BR/><BR/>The CCA's sentence appropriateness power is, in my mind, limited to considering the evidence presented at trial and determining whether the approved sentence is appropriate in light of the evidence submitted at trial. When the CCA starts taking clemency materials into account in deciding whether a sentence is appropriate, it comes dangerously close to usurping the CA's unrestrained right to grant or deny clemency. I don't see how the CCA's procedure here functionally would be any different from having an appellant argue to the CCA that he is entitled to sentence relief because he had a great clemency package and it was unreasonable for the CA to deny clemency.John O'Connorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08014476389355562158noreply@blogger.com