Whether military courts of criminal appeals have jurisdiction to review firearm prohibition errors and factual sufficiency challenges in court-martial proceedings

No question identified. : IN THE Supreme Court of the Anited States ZHuO H. ZHONG, Applicant, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. Application to the Hon. John G. Roberts, Jr. for Extension of Time to File a Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces Pursuant to Supreme Court Rules 13(5), 22, and 30, the Applicant, Zhuo H. Zhong, requests a sixty-day extension of time, to and including December 22, 2025, to file a Petition for a Writ of Certiorari. Unless an extension is granted, the deadline for filing the Petition for a Writ of Certiorari will be October 23, 2025. This Application is being filed more than ten days before that date. In support of this application, Applicant states the following: 1. The Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF) rendered its decision on July 25, 2025. This Court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1259(3). A copy of the CAAF’s order summarily affirming the lower court, of which Applicant seeks review, is attached to this application. 2. Applicant, a member of the United States Air Force, as tried by a military judge sitting as a general court-martial. United States v. Zhong, No. ACM 40441, 2024 CCA LEXIS 344, at *1 (A.F. Ct. Crim. App. Aug. 21, 2024). Relevant to this appeal, Applicant was convicted of one charge and specification of indecent recording in violation of 10 U.S.C. § 920c. Id. Applicant was sentenced to a bad-conduct discharge, confinement for two months, and reduction to the grade of E-1. Id. 3. Following his conviction, Applicant appealed to the Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals (AFCCA). Applicants raised, among other legal errors, that the Air Force’s application of 18 U.S.C. § 922 firearm prohibition post-conviction was erroneous and that his conviction was factually insufficient. The AFCCA declined to find jurisdiction to review the application of the firearm prohibition and found Applicant’s conviction to be factually sufficient. 4. Applicant petitioned the CAAF to review the AFCCAs’ decision. On May 8, 2025, the CAAF decided United States v. Csiti, 85 M.J. 414 (C.A.A.F. 2025), holding that the CAAF lacks the authority to review factual sufficiency. On June 24, 2025, the CAAF decided United States v. Johnson, __ M.J. __, No. 24-0004/SF, 2025 CAAF LEXIS 499 (C.A.A.F. June 24, 2025), holding that military courts of criminal appeals (including the AFCCA) do not have jurisdiction to correct the 18 U.S.C. § 922 indication error. As a result of these decisions, the CAAF summarily affirmed the AFCCA’s decision in Applicant’s case. 5. Applicant’s Air Force Appellate Defense Counsel, Major Frederick Johnson, is also detailed to thirty-two other cases. Since the CAAF’s decision in this case, counsel’s statutory obligations in representing other clients required him to complete briefing in a variety of other cases before the AFCCA and the CAAF. 6. Additionally, the Air Force Appellate Defense Division currently does not have paralegal support to assist with formatting petitions for this Court or filings before any other court. Applicant’s appellate defense counsel will be responsible for formatting the two lower court decisions for this petition and the other petitions to be filed before this Court. The reduction of paralegal support has severely hampered the Division’s ability to prepare petitions before this Court. 7. Further, the printing required for Applicants’ petition must be processed through a federal government agency (the Air Force), which has payment and processing requirements a private firm does not. The procurement process for a printing job cannot be forecasted with certainty, often has delays, and cuts approximately two weeks out of undersigned counsel’s time to finalize the Petition for a Writ of Certiorari. The recent close of the fiscal year, federal agency budgetary limitations, and the current lapse in appropriated funding, which is commonly known as the government shutdown, are also adding to the normal dela