In re Tommins

23 C.M.A. 410, 1 M.J. 33, 50 C.M.R. 292, 23 USCMA 410, 1975 CMA LEXIS 779

Opinion

MEMORANDUM OPINION OF THE COURT

The above-named individuals have submitted for this Court’s consideration, a document entitled "Petition of Intervention.” By this means each seeks to intervene in the case of Bouler v Wood, Miscellaneous Docket No. 75-16 (USCMA, filed May 2, 1975), evidently as parties petitioner.

The petitioners represent that they are held in pretrial confinement, and they request the issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the military judge named as respondent in Bouler v Wood, supra, to rule on motions for pretrial release "of all accused placed in pretrial confinement who appear before him with said motions,” or, in the alternative, to issue a writ of habeas corpus directing the release of said petitioners.

Prescinding from the fact that class actions are not encompassed within the scope of 28 USC § 1651(a), nor otherwise authorized within the scope of this Court’s jurisdiction,¹ to the extent that these petitioners assert individual claims for relief, their petition is ineffective for more fundamental reasons:

1.The charges under which each petitioner is confined pending trial are not set out. We cannot determine, therefore, whether or not their individual cases may eventually be the subject of a petition to this Court pursuant to Article 67(c)(3), Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 USC § 867(c)(3).²

2. There is no indication whether any of the charges have been referred to a court-martial authorized to impose a sentence within this Court’s jurisdictional limits.³

3. There is no indication that the charges against petitioners have been referred to a. court-martial to which the military judge named as respondent in Bouler v Wood, supra, has been detailed.

Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.

1 In re Watson, 19 USCMA 401, 42 CMR 3 (1970).

2 United States v Snyder, 18 USCMA 480, 40 CMR 192 (1969).

3 United States v Snyder, supra.