Court Opinion

ID: 9500451
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 18:14:12.819558+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:59:55.952913
License: Public Domain

CRAWFORD, Judge
(concurring in part and in the result):
I agree with the majority as to all the issues except Issue VI (APPELLATE DE*387LAY) and the affirmance of the remaining findings and sentence. I dissociate myself, however, from this Court’s analysis of that issue and its conclusion that Appellant was denied his due process right to speedy review and appeal. This Court’s analysis and conclusion are based on a prospective rule set forth in United States v. Moreno, 63 M.J. 129 (C.A.A.F.2006), and its misapplication of the Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514, 92 S.Ct. 2182, 33 L.Ed.2d 101 (1972), test. See Moreno, 63 M.J. at 144 (Crawford, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part).