|
Whoops! I meant to send my last email to Haytham, not to Jim
Haynes. But since Jim Haynes is no longer at DOD, I got back an
undeliverable message. :-)
Semper Fi,
DHS
In a message dated 7/9/2011 8:55:47 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
DHSULLIVAN@aol.com writes:
Team Wuterich,
Note that Gannon would be wrong even if this were an Article 62 appeal
stay. R.C.M. 908(b)(4) says that once the government files a written
notice of appeal, "no session f the court-martial may proceeding pending
disposition by the Court of Criminal Appeals of the appeal, except that solely
as to charges and specifications not affected by the ruling or order."
In this instance, there are no charges or specs unaffected by Jones'
ruling on the motion to abate. Gannon brought up the Article 62
analogy. You can shove that analogy down his throat.
Semper
Fi,
DHS
|