CrimProf Blog

Editor: Kevin Cole
Univ. of San Diego School of Law

Saturday, January 13, 2018

Next week's criminal law/procedure arguments

Issue summaries are from ScotusBlog, which also links to papers:

Tuesday

  • Cox v. U.S.: (1) Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces erred in holding that petitioners' claims—which asserted that a judge's service on the U.S. Court of Military Commission Review disqualifies him or her from continuing to serve on either the Army or Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals under 10 U.S.C. § 973(b)(2)(A)(ii)—were moot; (2) whether these judges' service on the U.S. Court of Military Commission Review disqualifies them from continuing to serve on the Army or Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals under 10 U.S.C. § 973(b)(2)(A)(ii); (3) whether the judges' simultaneous service on both the U.S Court of Military Commission Review and the Army or Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals violates the appointments clause; and (4) whether the Supreme Court has jurisdiction to review this case and Dalmazzi v. United States under 28 U.S.C. § 1259(3).

Wednesday

  • McCoy v. Louisiana: Whether it is unconstitutional for defense counsel to concede an accused's guilt over the accused's express objection.

https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/crimprof_blog/2018/01/next-weeks-criminal-lawprocedure-argument.html

| Permalink

Comments

Post a comment