Legal Opinion · Dissent

Toohey v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces

Decided July 2, 2004No. 04-8019/MC; Crim.App. 200001621Published

1DissentCrawford, Chief Judge

Petitioner has raised the issue of post-trial delay before the court below and that issue is currently pending before the Court of Criminal Appeals.1 This Court abuses its authority and its -writ jurisdiction by directing the lower court to rule, and suggesting how it should rule, on an issue that is already properly before it on direct review. For these reasons, I respectfully dissent.

The court below is well aware of this Court’s jurisprudence in the area of post-trial delay,2 and is quite capable of applying that jurisprudence to the facts of this case. It is most inappropriate for this…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Doggett v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  2. United States v. TardifCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2002
  3. Murray v. HaldemanUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1983
  4. United States v. FrischholzUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1966
  5. Diaz v. The Judge Advocate General of the NavyCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2003

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API