United States v. Soria
76 M.J. 121, 2017 CAAF LEXIS 73
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces
DecidedFebruary 3, 2017
DocketNo. 17-0159/AR
StatusPublished
This text of 76 M.J. 121 (United States v. Soria) 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. Soria, 76 M.J. 121, 2017 CAAF LEXIS 73 (Ark. 2017).
Opinion
CCA 20150537. 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 issues:
I. WHETHER ACCEPTANCE OF APPOINTMENT AS A CMCR JUDGE TERMINATED THE MILITARY COMMISSIONS OF JUDGES BURTON AND CELTNIEKS.
II. WHETHER, AS APPOINTED JUDGES OF THE CMCR, JUDGES BURTON AND CELTNIEKS DID NOT MEET THE UCMJ DEFINITION OF AN APPELLATE JUDGE.
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
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
76 M.J. 121, 2017 CAAF LEXIS 73, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-soria-armfor-2017.