United States v. LaBella
2015 CAAF LEXIS 1135
| C.A.A.F. | 2015Background
- Appellant LaBella was convicted by a general court-martial of two specifications of wrongful possession of child pornography and received a bad-conduct discharge, confinement, forfeitures, and reduction in grade.
- The Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals (CCA) initially affirmed; LaBella sought review to the CAAF, which remanded to the CCA for reconsideration under this Court’s Barberi guidance.
- After remand the CCA again affirmed and mailed its decision; LaBella acknowledged receipt on July 27, 2014 and was informed he had 60 days to petition the CAAF.
- LaBella did not file a petition for review with this Court within the 60-day statutory period (which expired Sept. 5, 2014).
- On Dec. 3, 2014 LaBella moved the CCA for leave to file a petition for reconsideration out of time; the Government opposed, arguing the case had become final and the CCA lacked jurisdiction.
- The CCA granted leave to file out of time but denied reconsideration on the merits; the CAAF held the CCA lacked jurisdiction to grant leave and dismissed LaBella’s petition for lack of jurisdiction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the CCA could grant leave to file a petition for reconsideration after the 60-day statutory period and after the case became final | LaBella: equitable tolling and CCA’s inherent authority permit granting leave and tolling the CAAF filing period | Government: case became final when LaBella failed to file timely with CAAF; CCA lacked jurisdiction after finality | CAAF: CCA lacked jurisdiction to grant reconsideration out of time once the statutory period expired and the case was final; CAAF therefore lacks jurisdiction to review |
| Whether CAAF has jurisdiction to hear LaBella’s petition after CCA granted leave to file out of time | LaBella: CCA’s grant revived appellate rights and CAAF can review | Government: CAAF jurisdiction is statutory and the untimely filing cannot be cured by CCA action | CAAF: statutory 60-day limit is jurisdictional; because CCA had no jurisdiction to grant relief, CAAF must dismiss for lack of jurisdiction |
Key Cases Cited
- Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375 (1994) (federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction)
- Bender v. Williamsport Area Sch. Dist., 475 U.S. 534 (1986) (appellate courts must ensure their jurisdiction and that of lower courts)
- Rodriguez, 67 M.J. 110 (C.A.A.F. 2009) (60-day statutory filing period in Article 67(b)(2) is jurisdictional)
- Smith, 68 M.J. 445 (C.A.A.F. 2010) (filing a timely motion for reconsideration at the CCA suspends the CAAF filing period until CCA disposition)
- Clinton v. Goldsmith, 526 U.S. 529 (1999) (finality principles)
- Loving v. United States, 64 M.J. 132 (C.A.A.F. 2006) (finality of court-martial proceedings after statutory deadlines)