No. 24-7069

Thomas M. Adams v. United States

Lower Court: Armed Forces
Docketed: 2025-04-24
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Amici (1)Response WaivedIFP
Tags: court-of-appeals judicial-review military-justice petition-review statutory-interpretation uniform-code-military-justice
Latest Conference: 2025-05-29
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Does the mandate under Article 67(a)(3) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice permit the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces to deny review where a petitioner has presented a meritorious issue?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

Article 67(a)(3), Uniform Code of Military Justice [UCMJ], 10 U.S.C. ยง 867(a)(3), provides that the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces [CAAF] โ€œ shall review the record in . . . all cases . . . in which, upon petition of the accused and on good cause shown, [the CAAF] has granted a review.โ€ Does the mandate under 67(a)(3) permit the CAAF to deny review where petitioner has presented a meritorious issue?

Docket Entries

2025-06-02
Petition DENIED.
2025-05-14
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/29/2025.
2025-05-07
Waiver of United States of right to respond submitted.
2025-05-07
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2025-04-28
Amicus brief of National Institute of Military Justice submitted.
2025-04-28
2025-04-21
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due May 27, 2025)
2025-02-14
Application (24A780) granted by The Chief Justice extending the time to file until April 21, 2025.
2025-02-07
Application (24A780) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from February 20, 2025 to April 21, 2025, submitted to The Chief Justice.

Attorneys

National Institute of Military Justice
Eugene Roy FidellFeldesman Leifer LLP, Amicus
Thomas Adams
Robert Warren RodriguezU.S. Army Defense Appellate Division, Petitioner
United States
D. John SauerSolicitor General, Respondent