Case Name: U.S. v. John C. Riesbeck
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2014-12-11
Citations: 74 M.J. 176
Docket Number: No. 15-0074/CG
Parties: U.S. v. John C. Riesbeck.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Military Justice Reporter
Volume: 74
Pages: 176–177

Head Matter:
Thursday, December 11, 2014
No. 15-0074/CG.
U.S. v. John C. Riesbeck.

Opinion:
CCA 1374. On consideration of Appellant's petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals, we conclude that the issue of improper member selection was not waived because of the exception contained in Rule for Courts-Martial (RCM) 912(b)(3) to the timeliness requirement of RCM 912(b)(1). On its face, RCM 912(b)(3) provides an exception to waiver where the objection is made on the basis of an allegation that the convening authority selected members in violation of RCM 502(a)(1) for reasons other than those listed in Article 25(d)(2), Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), 10 U.S.C. § 825(d)(2) (2012): age, education, training, experience, length of service, and judicial temperament. Furthermore, improper member selection can constitute unlawful command influence, an issue that cannot be waived. United States v. Baldwin, 54 M.J. 308, 310 n. 2 (C.A.A.F.2001). Because the exception of RCM 912(b)(3) should have applied, the question remains whether Appellant was deprived of a fair trial by an impartial panel. Accordingly, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the following issue:
WAS APPELLANT DEPRIVED OF A FAIR TRIAL BY AN IMPARTIAL PANEL?
The decision of the United States Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals is set aside, and the case is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Coast Guard for remand to the Court of Criminal Appeals for further review under Article 66(c), UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 866(c) (2012). Thereafter, Article 67, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 867 (2012), shall apply.