U.S. v. Seider, 60 M.J. 36

Trial Stages: Appeals: Courts of Criminal Appeals › Factual sufficiency

1. the issue in this case focuses upon the uncertainty in this particular verdict – a circumstance involving the conversion of a “divers occasion” specification to a “one occasion” specification through exceptions; because the findings of guilty and not guilty do not disclose the conduct upon which each of them was based, the Court of Criminal Appeals cannot conduct a factual sufficiency review of Appellant’s conviction; as we noted in Walters, the Court of Criminal Appeals is prevented from even conducting its factual sufficiency review by the fundamental rule that the Court of Criminal Appeals cannot find as fact any allegation in a specification for which the factfinder below has found the accused not guilty; the defect is neither a question of the legal or factual sufficiency of the evidence, nor is it a question to be resolved by weighing evidence and concluding that evidence is quantitatively or qualitatively inferior

Trial Stages: Appeals: Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces

1. where we cannot determine whether the Court of Criminal Appeals reviewed and affirmed an offense of which the accused was acquitted, we cannot affirm that finding