No. 24-6952

David J. Rudometkin v. United States

Lower Court: Armed Forces
Docketed: 2025-04-09
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: all-writs-act appellate-defense-counsel court-of-appeals-for-armed-forces jurisdiction military-justice sixth-amendment
Latest Conference: 2025-05-02
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF) has jurisdiction to deny appellate defense counsel assigned by U.S. Army Judge Advocate General when Petitioner did not knowingly waive assigned counsel, and whether the Sixth Amendment deprives the CAAF of jurisdiction to review legal matters

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

The questions presented are: Whether the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF) has jurisdiction to deny appellate defense counsel assigned by U.S. Army Judge Advocate General under 10 U.S.C. § 870, when Petitioner did not knowingly, intelligently, or by conduct waive assigned appellate defense counsel. Given, the CAAF does not have jurisdiction to assign or deny appellate defense counsel, whether the Sixth Amendment deprives the CAAF of jurisdiction to review any legal matters pursuant to 10 U.S.C. § 867(a)-(c) and under the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. §1651.

Docket Entries

2025-05-05
Petition DENIED.
2025-04-17
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/2/2025.
2025-04-15
Waiver of United States of right to respond submitted.
2025-04-15
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2025-03-15
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due May 9, 2025)

Attorneys

David J. Rudometkin
David J. Rudometkin — Petitioner
David J. Rudometkin — Petitioner
United States
D. John SauerSolicitor General, Respondent
D. John SauerSolicitor General, Respondent
Sarah M. HarrisActing Solicitor General, Respondent