Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces

​No. 23-0027/AF. U.S. v. James T. Cunningham. CCA 40093. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the following issues:
 
I.   WHETHER THE AIR FORCE COURT PROPERLY APPLIED UNITED STATES v. EDWARDS, 82 M.J. 239 (C.A.A.F. 2022) IN FINDING ERROR—BUT NO PREJUDICE—FOR A VICTIM IMPACT STATEMENT THAT INCLUDED VIDEOS, PERSONAL PICTURES, STOCK IMAGES OF FUTURE EVENTS, AND LYRICAL MUSIC THAT TOUCHED ON THEMES OF DYING, SAYING FAREWELL, AND BECOMING AN ANGEL IN HEAVEN.
 
II.  WHETHER TRIAL COUNSEL'S SENTENCING ARGUMENT WAS IMPROPER UNDER UNITED STATES v. WARREN, 13 M.J. 278 (C.M.A. 1982) AND UNITED STATES v. NORWOOD, 81 M.J. 12 (C.A.A.F. 2021), RESPECTIVELY, WHEN SHE: (1) ARGUED THAT APPELLANT'S UNCHARGED, FALSE STATEMENTS WERE AGGRAVATING EVIDENCE AFTER SHE HAD PREVIOUSLY CITED CASE LAW TO THE MILITARY JUDGE THAT SAID FALSE STATEMENTS WERE NOT ADMISSIBLE AS EVIDENCE IN AGGRAVATION; AND (2) TOLD THE MILITARY JUDGE THAT HE HAD SEEN THE MEDIA AND THE WORLD WAS WATCHING, TO JUSTIFY HER SENTENCE RECOMMENDATION.
 
III. WHETHER APPELLANT WAS DEPRIVED OF THE RIGHT TO A UNANIMOUS VERDICT UNDER RAMOS v. LOUISIANA, 140 S.CT. 1390 (2020), AFTER THE MILITARY JUDGE DENIED HIS MOTION FOR UNANIMITY, DENIED HIS REQUEST TO POLL THE PANEL ON WHETHER ITS VERDICT WAS UNANIMOUS, AND THE AIR FORCE COURT DISMISSED THE ISSUE WITH NO DISCUSSION.