CONWAY, PRISTERA, GALLI & ASSOCIATES
  • Military Appeals Lawyers
  • Practice Areas
  • Appellate Attorneys

United States v. Allred

(On consideration of the entire record, the finding of guilty of The Specification of Additional Charge IV and Additional Charge IV is SET ASIDE and that Specification and Additional Charge is DISMISSED. )

United States v. Anderson

United States v. Ayalacruz

United States v. Bickford

United States v. Brown
(The findings of guilty to Specification 2 of Charge II and to Charge II are set aside. Specification 2 of Charge II and Charge II are dismissed with prejudice.)

United States v. Boyle

​United States v. Butler


United States v. Calhoun 
(Findings as to Specification 13, of Charge 1 Set Aside and Dismissed.) 


United States v. Cabral

United States v. Coloncordero 
(The findings of guilty of Specifications 1 and 2 of The Charge and The Charge are AFFIRMED. The findings of guilty of Specifications 4, 5, and 6 of The Charge are conditionally SET ASIDE and conditionally DISMISSED.)

United States v. Cooper

United States v. Covitz 
(Findings and sentence set aside.)

United States v. Daniels


United States v. Ellis
(
The findings and sentence are set aside. The record is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy for remand to an appropriate CA with a rehearing authorized.)

United States v. Ferguson

United States v. Gardiner

United States v. Grigoruk


United States v. Hale 
(The findings and sentence were set aside). 

United States v. Hernandez
(
The findings and sentence as approved by the convening authority are affirmed. The supplemental court-martial order will reflect sexual “contact” instead of sexual “act” in Specification 2 of Charge II.)

United States v. Hiser

United States  v. Jeffries


United States v. Jesko 
(
Specification 1 of Charge I and Specification 8 of Charge III, to which appellant pled guilty, are SET ASIDE. )

United States v. Jungklaus Dadona

United States v. King

United States v. Lavergne


​United States v. Leonard
(
The decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals is reversed. The findings and sentence are set aside and a rehearing is authorized.)

United States  v. Mahler

United States v. Marcus​


United States v. Masga 

United States v. Martin

United States v. Marshall

United States v. Montgomery

United States v. Moulton


​United States v. Novak
(We set aside the guilty finding to Charge I and its sole specification and dismiss Charge 1 and its specification.)

​
United States  v. Penn

U.S. v. Pitre
(
The court affirms only so much of the findings of guilty of The Specification of Charge III,)

United States v. Pflug
(The finding of guilty as to Specification 2 of Charge I and the sentence are set aside).

United States v. Reshke

​United States v. Riojas


United States v. Roberts
(The Convening Authority's initial action was set aside). 


United States v. Rodriguez
(
On consideration of the entire record, the finding of guilty as to Specification 4 of Charge II is SET ASIDE and DISMISSED. )

United States v. Rushatz

​United States v. Scott
(
Accordingly, the record of trial and all related appellate documents are returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy for transmittal to the appropriate convening authority. )

United States v. Smith

United States v. St. Jean


United States v. Sutton
(The decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals was reversed. The finding of guilty to the charge and its specification and the sentence are set aside. The charge and specification are dismissed.)

United States v. Tavares

United States v. Vela


United States v. Vidal 
(
The Convening Authority's initial action was set aside. Charges were eventually dismissed and an administrative resolution occurred). 

U.S. v. Washington

United States v. Weatherspoon

United States  v. Wible​

United States v. Williams

​


Andrews v. Webb

Barrett v. McHugh

Bond v. United States


Bublitz v. Brownlee
(
FURTHER ORDERED that this action shall be TRANSFERRED to the Court of Federal Claims.)

Charette v. Walker

​Chenault v. McHugh

​Cook v. United States


​Daniels v. United States

Ey v. McHugh

Gilbert v. James
(
ORDERED that this matter be STAYED, temporarily, to allow for reconsideration de novo by the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records, of the plaintiffs' petitions for correction of their military records, pursuant to 10 U.S.C. § 1552; and it is further
ORDERED that the parties shall file, by March 31, 2016, and every ninety days thereafter, a joint status report describing the progress of the consideration of the plaintiffs' petitions.)

Gilbert v. Wilson


Homer v. Roche
"
For the reasons stated in the Court's accompanying Memorandum Opinion, it is herebyORDERED that plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is GRANTED."

​
Hoskins v. United States

Ingham v. United States

Magenson v. Mabus

McDonough v. Mabus

​Metz v. United States
(For the reasons set forth above, plaintiff's motion for judgment is GRANTED. The clerk shall enter judgment awarding MSgt. Metz relief as follows: (1) back pay in the amount of $30,300.74 for the period from September 9, 1994 through October 30, 1995;
(2) early retirement starting on October 31, 1995, back retirement pay in the grade of E–7 from October 31, 1995 to the present, and retirement pay for the remainder of MSgt. Metz's natural life; (3) expurgation of all references to MSgt. Metz's separation in lieu of court-martial from his record.)


Kosnik v. Peters

Lopez-Velazquez v. United States

​Ludlow v. Mabus
(Plaintiff's cross-motion for summary judgement granted).

​
Nishitani v. United States

Poole v. Harvey

"The court concludes that Poole's motion for summary judgment must be granted insofar as it contends that the ABCMR's decision is arbitrary and capricious and denied insofar as it requests that this court order Poole's retroactive promotion."

Price v. United States

Schaefer v. Geren

Shrader v. United States

​
Aquino v. Stone
Widmer v. Stokes
Unger v. Ziemniak
Rebosky v. U.S.
Schaefer v. White
Martin v. United States
​Nation v. Dalton
​Anderson v. United States
​
​Clark v. Widnall
Miller v. Roche
Cochrane v. Wynne
Scott v. United States

Chambers v. Green
Lassalle v. Geren
​© COPYRIGHT 2024.. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 
The information on this page is informational in nature. Nothing on this or associated pages should be construed as legal advice for a particular case. Likewise, the information on this website does not constitute the creation of an attorney-client relationship. No representation is made that the quality of legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.
Free Initial Consultations
Confidential. In depth. Valuable.

833-934-UCMJ
Picture
  • Military Appeals Lawyers
  • Practice Areas
  • Appellate Attorneys