United States v. Gurczynski

76 M.J. 42, 2016 CAAF LEXIS 989
Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces·Decided December 14, 2016·No. No. 17-0041/AR·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

CCA 20140518. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the 'decision of the United States Army Court [43] of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the following issues:

I.WHETHER ACCEPTANCE OF APPOINTMENT AS CMCR JUDGES TERMINATED THE MILITARY COMMISSIONS OF JUDGE HERRING AND JUDGE BURTON.
II.WHETHER, AS APPOINTED JUDGES OF THE CMCR, JUDGE HERRING AND JUDGE BURTON DID NOT MEET THE UCMJ DEFINITION OF APPELLATE MILITARY JUDGES.
III.WHETHER THE ASSIGNMENT OF INFERIOR OFFICERS AND PRINCIPAL OFFICERS TO A SINGLE JUDICIAL TRIBUNAL ITSELF VIOLATED THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE.

No briefs will be filed under Rule 25.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

United States v. Gurczynski, 76 M.J. 42, 2016 CAAF LEXIS 989 (Ark. 2016).

76 M.J. 42 (United States v. Gurczynski) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

United States v. Gurczynski
76 M.J. 441 (Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, 2017)