Whether the proper scope and standard of review for a service member's habeas corpus petition challenging a military court proceeding is in accordance with the Burns v. Wilson 'full and fair consideration' standard

Questions Presented for Review . In Burns v. Wilson, 346 U.S. 137 (1958), this Court addressed the scope of review the civil courts must apply when considering a service member’s _ habeas corpus petition challenging a military court proceeding. However, the Court did not offer a detailed scope for the lower courts to apply. This has resulted in the Circuit Courts developing drastically different frameworks where a petitioner’s success in gaining review is dependent upon which Circuit the petition is filed. 1. Of the varying Circuit Courts’ developed standards for determining if review of a military proceeding is appropriate, which scope and standard of review is proper and in accordance with the Burns’ full and fair consideration standard? 2. Does the holding in Fletcher v. Outlaw, 578 F.3d 274 (5th Cir. 2009), as applied in Riojas’ case, adequately determine whether a military court fully and fairly considered a claim when it does not account for an abuse of discretion or whether proper legal standards were applied? . ! | ' Parties to Proceeding e 1. Christine E. Wormuth, Secretary of the Army