United States v. Kidd

76 M.J. 75, 2017 CAAF LEXIS 57
Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces·Decided January 31, 2017·No. No. 17-0166/AR·Published

Opinion

CCA 20150280. On consideration of tHe petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the following issue:

WHETHER JUDGE JAMES W. HERRING, JUDGE ON THE COURT OF MILITARY COMMISSION REVIEW, WAS STATUTORILY AUTHORIZED TO SIT ON THE ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS, AND EVEN IF HE WAS STATUTORILY AUTHORIZED TO BE ASSIGNED TO THE ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS, WHETHER HIS . SERVICE ON BOTH COURTS VIOLATED THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE GIVEN HIS NEWLY ATTAINED STATUS AS A SUPERIOR OFFICER.

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. Kidd, 76 M.J. 75, 2017 CAAF LEXIS 57 (Ark. 2017).

76 M.J. 75 (United States v. Kidd) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.