U.S. v. Oestmann, 61 M.J. 103

Miscellaneous Matters: Speedy Trial: Post-Trial

1. in the course of addressing the issue of timely appellate review and finding that appellant had failed to show that the delay was unreasonable, the court below commented that appellant did not raise the issue before the convening authority acted; however, the timeliness issue did not involve the period preceding the convening authority’s action; rather, the issue involved the period after the convening authority acted -- the unexplained and unusual period of more than one year and five months to accomplish the routine, nondiscretionary, ministerial task of transmitting the record from the convening authority to the appellate review activity; because the court below did not focus on the relevant period of delay, we decline to rely on the court’s conclusion that relief would not be warranted for unreasonable and unexplained delay and remand it to the lower court for further review of the sentence under Toohey, Diaz, Tardif, and Jones