Court Opinion

ID: 7271224
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-07-25 07:28:31.84613+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:18:46.759047
License: Public Domain

CCA 20070243. Review granted on the following issues:
WHETHER THE LOWER COURT ERRED IN AFFIRMING THE FINDING OF GUILTY AS TO SPECIFICATION 3 OF CHARGE III WHEN IT FOUND THAT AN ONLINE CHAT CONTAINING THE LINE ‘U FREE TONIGHT WAS SUFFICIENT TO PROVE ATTEMPTED ENTICEMENT.
WHETHER THE ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS ERRED BY AFFIRMING FORFEITURE OF ALL PAY AND ALLOWANCES WHEN THE CONVENING AUTHORITY DID NOT APPROVE ANY FORFEITURE.
WHETHER AN ARTICLE 134 CLAUSE 1 OR 2 SPECIFICATION THAT FAILS TO EXPRESSLY ALLEGE EITHER POTENTIAL TERMINAL ELEMENT STATES AN OFFENSE UNDER THE SUPREME COURT’S HOLDINGS IN UNITED STATES v. RESENDIZ-PONCE AND RUSSELL v. UNITED STATES, AND THIS COURT’S RECENT OPINIONS IN MEDINA, MILLER, AND JONES.
Briefs will be filed under Rule 25 on Issues I and II only.