United States v. Henry

Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces

United States v. Henry

76 M.J. 431, 2017 CAAF LEXIS 708

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces

DecidedJuly 12, 2017

DocketNo. 17-0441/AF

StatusPublished

This text of 76 M.J. 431 (United States v. Henry) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United States v. Henry, 76 M.J. 431, 2017 CAAF LEXIS 708 (Ark. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

CCA 38886. On consideration of Appellee’s motion to dismiss the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals for lack of jurisdiction, it is noted that the Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed several of the findings of guilty, set aside other findings of guilty and the sentence, and remanded the record with a rehearing authorized. Under Article 67(c), UCMJ, this. Court has jurisdiction to consider the petition. However, given the possibility of a rehearing, the petition is not ripe for review at this time. Accordingly, it is ordered that the motion to dismiss the petition for lack of jurisdiction is hereby denied, and the petition for grant of review is denied without prejudice to Appellant’s right to raise the matters asserted during the normal course of appellate review.

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

CCA 38886. On consideration of Appellee’s motion to dismiss the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals for lack of jurisdiction, it is noted that the Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed several of the findings of guilty, set aside other findings of guilty and the sentence, and remanded the record with a rehearing authorized. Under Article 67(c), UCMJ, this. Court has jurisdiction to consider the petition. However, given the possibility of a rehearing, the petition is not ripe for review at this time. Accordingly, it is ordered that the motion to dismiss the petition for lack of jurisdiction is hereby denied, and the petition for grant of review is denied without prejudice to Appellant’s right to raise the matters asserted during the normal course of appellate review.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

76 M.J. 431, 2017 CAAF LEXIS 708, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-henry-armfor-2017.