|United States Court of Appeals|
for the Armed Forces,
Over at CAAFlog
, we find a link to a 10-point proposal
for reform of American military justice procedure by Colonel James A. Young
, USAF (Ret). From the discussion of the eighth recommendation, relating to the appellate process, we learn that appellate defense counsel identified issues in only 40% of the cases submitted to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces on petition for discretionary review in FY2013. In 21% of the 776 cases in which complete petitions (i.e
., those with supplements) were filed, neither counsel nor the appellant identified an issue, and in the remaining 39%, the appellant but not counsel identified a Grostefon
issue. Under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, the court may grant review "on good cause shown," a provision it has long (and, in the editor's opinion, incorrectly) read to permit it to rummage for issues on its own. Col. Young observes in a footnote that when Congress authorized good-cause review "it is unlikely its members envisioned a court that would review records of trial in cases in which neither the accused nor counsel could find an error to allege."
Post a Comment
Comments are subject to moderation and must be submitted under your real name. Anonymous comments will not be posted (even though the form seems to permit them).