[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: bubbles answered
Here we go -- this is from the Government's second Article 62 appeal
brief:
At an Article 39(a), Uniform Code of Military Justice,
session on March 12, 2009, at 1330 hours, the Military Judge made
findings of fact and conclusions of law in the subject case, and
granted Non-Party CBS Broadcasting, Inc.âs (CBS) Motion to Quash
Subpoena Duces Tecum. On March 13, 2009, at 1200 hours, Trial
Counsel provided the Military Judge with written notice of the
Governmentâs intent to seek an interlocutory appeal of the
courtâs ruling under Article 62, UCMJ, and Rule for Courts-
Martial 908, Manual for Courts-Martial, United States (2008 ed.).
Appendix A.
-----Original Message-----
From: Puckett Neal <neal@puckettfaraj.com>
To: dhsullivan@aol.com
Cc: Faraj Haytham <haytham@puckettfaraj.com>; CODE Sripinyo Kirk Major
NAMARA 45 <kirk.sripinyo@navy.mil>
Sent: Thu, Nov 4, 2010 2:20 pm
Subject: Re: bubbles answered
Pretty sure it was 2010 vice 2009. ÂThere was no hearing in Mar 2009.
ÂColby was not on the record until after the second appeal, I think.
ÂLet's check Haytham's recollection of this.
Neal A. Puckett, Esq
LtCol, USMC (Ret)
Puckett & Faraj, PC
1800 Diagonal Rd, Suite 210
Alexandria, VA 22314
703.706.9566
www.puckettfaraj.comÂ
The information contained in this electronic message is confidential,
and is intended for the use of the individual or entity named above. If
you are not the intended recipient of this message, you are hereby
notified that any use, distribution, copying of disclosure of this
communication is strictly prohibited. If you received this
communication in error, please notify Puckett & Faraj, P.C. at
888-970-0005 or via a return the e-mail to sender.ÂÂYou are required to
purge this E-mail immediately without reading or making any copy or
distribution.
On Nov 4, 2010, at 10:48 AM, dhsullivan@aol.com wrote:
Neal -- at one point in the brief, we say:
On March 22, 2009 â after the Governmentâs first Article 62 appeal but
before its second â an Article 39(a) session was held to hear motions.
ÂLtCol Vokey (Ret.) and Maj Faraj (Ret.) were both present as civilian
counsel, though neither filed a notice of appearance. ÂThe military
judge, LtCol Meeks, made no inquiry concerning either LtCol Vokeyâs or
Maj Farajâs changed status.
Is that right? ÂIf so, would that be Colby's first post-retirment
Article 39(a)?
Semper Fi,
Dwight
-----Original Message-----
From: Puckett Neal <neal@puckettfaraj.com>
To: Sullivan Dwight <dwight.sullivan@pentagon.af.mil>; Sullivan
Dwight <DHSULLIVAN@aol.com>
Cc: CODE Major NAMARA 45 Sripinyo Kirk <kirk.sripinyo@navy.mil>;
Faraj Haytham <haytham@puckettfaraj.com>
Sent: Thu, Nov 4, 2010 1:40 pm
Subject: bubbles answered
Neal A. Puckett, Esq
LtCol, USMC (Ret)
Puckett & Faraj, PC
1800 Diagonal Rd, Suite 210
Alexandria, VA 22314
703.706.9566
www.puckettfaraj.comÂ
The information contained in this electronic message is confidential,
and is intended for the use of the individual or entity named above. If
you are not the intended recipient of this message, you are hereby
notified that any use, distribution, copying of disclosure of this
communication is strictly prohibited. If you received this
communication in error, please notify Puckett & Faraj, P.C. at
888-970-0005 or via a return the e-mail to sender.ÂÂYou are required to
purge this E-mail immediately without reading or making any copy or
distribution.
=
=