In United States v. Hollings, No. 07-0084/MC, issued today, CAAF took a polite swipe at the appellate defense counsel for being less than candid with the tribunal: "We are left to wonder whether we are reviewing a different record of trial." At 6.
The sole issue in the case was whether the military judge erred by failing to grant a defense challenge for cause against a chief warrant officer court member "who served as acting legal officer to the convening authority in appellant's case." According to Judge Baker, writing for a unanimous court, there was no evidence the CWO acted as a legal advisor to the convening authority on any case.
That all five judges signed on to such an unusual action should send a message to counsel. I doubt he will be citing this case on his resume.
I bet the oral argument was interesting.
1 comment:
Dude,
I don't know who you are, but I have a good guess. Suffice it to say, I took a humorous swipe at your name over at CAAFlog just a few seconds ago, without knowing you commented on the same case (Hollings).
Bottom line, we agree, and indeed, the message send (I believe) is as you suspect. If you're who I think you are, you'll know who I am and know that the simultaneous postings verify my suspicions are correct.
Great job with the blog.
Howard Truth
Post a Comment