Whether the court-martial had jurisdiction over the charged conduct

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Judicial deference “is at its apogee’ when reviewing congressional” decisions related to military discipline. Weiss v. United States, 510 U.S. 163, 177 (1994) (quoting Rostker v. Goldberg, 453 U.S. 57, 70 (1981)). Congress exercised its constitutional authority over such matters to narrowly limit courtmartial jurisdiction to try reserve members of the military. U.S. Const. art. I, § 8, cl. 14; 10 U.S.C. § 802(a). In this case, the trial judge instructed that a conviction for attempted larceny could rest on any or all of three overt acts, two of which fell outside those jurisdictional limits. The Court of Appeals found no prejudice because the evidence pertaining to the third overt act was “sufficient.” The Questions Presented are: 1. Whether the Court of Appeals erred in relying on factual sufficiency of the evidence to resolve a question of plain error, where the alleged error related to a legal defect in jurisdiction. 2. Whether instructions focusing “on or about” the charged dates invited a general verdict based on conduct outside of the court-martial’s jurisdiction. i