Staying inside the grant: a reminder from CAAF

. . .  [T]he only question before us is “[w]hether it is legally impossible for Appellant to be convicted of distributing indecent images to himself under Article 77, UCMJ, when the plain language of Article 120c(a)(d)(5), UCMJ, requires the images be distributed to ‘another.’ ” This issue does not encompass the question whether an accused can aid and abet someone who is not subject to the UCMJ or does not violate state law. While the NMCCA addressed and rejected Appellant’s argument in its opinion, see Simpson, 2020 CCA LEXIS 67, at *17-18, 2020 WL 1173334, at *6, we did not grant review of the issue. United States v. Guardado, 77 M.J. 90, 95 n.1 (C.A.A.F. 2017 (declining to address an argument outside the scope of the issues for which review was granted).

From the Opinion of the Court, per Maggs, J., in United States v. Simpson, No. 20-0268 (C.A.A.F. Mar. 10, 2021)