Dwight Sullivan

March 2022

MILITARY DEATH PENALTY SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY

Manual for Courts-Martial Provisions

MANUAL FOR COURTS-MARTIAL, United States, R.C.M. 1004 (2019 ed.)

MANUAL FOR COURTS-MARTIAL, United States, R.C.M. 1204(c)(2) (2019 ed.) (presidential
review procedures)

MANUAL FOR COURTS-MARTIAL, United States, R.C.M. 1207 (2019 ed.) (sentences requiring
presidential approval)

MANUAL FOR COURTS-MARTIAL, United States, R.C.M. 1004 analysis, app. 15, at A15-19 (2019
ed.)

MANUAL FOR COURTS-MARTIAL, United States, R.C.M. 1004 analysis, app. 21, at A21-75 to
A21-80 (2016 ed.)

MANUAL FOR COURTS-MARTIAL, United States, R.C.M. 1204 analysis, app. 15, at A15-23 (2019
ed.)

MANUAL FOR COURTS-MARTIAL, United States, R.C.M. 1207 analysis, app. 15, at A15-23 (2019
ed.)

MANUAL FOR COURTS-MARTIAL, United States, R.C.M. 1207 analysis, app. 21, at A21-97 (2016
ed.)

Service Regulations

DEP’T OF ARMY, REG. NO. 190-55, U.S. ARMY CORRECTIONS SYSTEM: PROCEDURES FOR
MILITARY EXECUTIONS (9 September 2019)

SECNAVINST 5815.4, PROCEDURES FOR EXECUTIONS WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
(24 Aug 1993)

R.C.M. 1004 Era Military Death Penalty Cases

A. Cases in which a death sentence remains in effect (4 – all Army)

1. United States v. Gray (death sentence approved by the President; SCOTUS denied cert of
CAAF’s dismissal of writ-appeal on June 28, 2018; on federal habeas corpus review in United
States District Court for the District of Kansas) (Army, sentenced in 1988)
 Gray v. Johnston, No. 5:18-cv-03305-EFM (D. Kan.) (ongoing)
138 S. Ct. 2709 (2018) (denying certiorari petition)
77 M.J. 5 (C.A.A.F. 2017) (per curiam) (dismissing writ-appeal for lack of jurisdiction)
76 M.J. 579 (A. Ct. Crim. App. 2017) (en banc) (denying coram nobis relief) (Gray v.
United States)
No. 5:08-cv-03289-JTM (D. Kan. Dec. 20, 2016) (mem.) (ruling that previously granted
stay is no longer in effect and denying without prejudice a request to enter a stay) (Gray
v. Hilton)
No. 5:08-cv-03289-JTM (D. Kan. Oct. 26, 2016) (mem.) (dismissing habeas petition
without prejudice to allow litigation of unexhausted claims in the military justice system)
(Gray v. Belcher)
75 M.J. 369 (C.A.A.F. June 8, 2016) (mem.) (denying writ appeal without prejudice)
(Gray v. Nelson)
645 Fed. Appx. 624, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 6514 (10th Cir. Apr. 8, 2016) (per curiam)
(reversing and remanding United States District Court for the District of Kansas’s ruling
on habeas challenge to military death sentence) (Gray v. Gray)
2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 171129 (D. Kan. Dec. 23, 2015) (denying reconsideration) (Gray
v. Belcher)
2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 131345 (D. Kan. Sept. 29, 2015) (denying petition for writ of
habeas corpus in part/dismissing without prejudice petition for writ of habeas corpus in
part) (Gray v. Belcher)
2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13746 (D. Kan. Feb. 5, 2015) (ordering oral argument on petition
for writ of habeas corpus and identifying issues for counsel to address)
71 M.J. 300 (C.A.A.F. 2012) (summary disposition) (denying writ appeal without
prejudice to raising issues in United States District Court for the District of Kansas)
(Gray v. Belcher)
70 M.J. 646 (A. Ct. Crim. App. 2012) (denying coram nobis relief) (Gray v. Belcher)
2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 103739 (D. Kan. Sept. 30, 2010) (order) (Gray v. Gray)
51 M.J. 1 (C.A.A.F. 1999) (affirming death sentence), reconsideration denied, 53 M.J.
242 (C.A.A.F.), second reconsideration denied, 54 M.J. 223 (C.A.A.F. 2000), cert.
denied, 532 U.S. 919 (2001), reh’g denied, 532 U.S. 1035 (2001)
40 M.J. 25 (C.M.A. 1994) (order denying funding for investigator)
39 M.J. 437 (C.M.A. 1994) (order concerning continuity of appellate counsel)
39 M.J. 351 (C.M.A. 1993) (order concerning continuity of appellate counsel)
37 M.J. 751 (A.C.M.R. 1993) (rejecting supplemental issues)
37 M.J. 730 (A.C.M.R. 1992) (affirming death sentence and denying petition for new
trial)
32 M.J. 730 (A.C.M.R. 1991) (denying funding petition)

2. United States v. Akbar (affirmed by A. Ct. Crim. App. and CAAF; cert. denied; pending
presidential action) (Army, sentenced in 2005)
137 S. Ct. 41 (2016) (denying certiorari)
74 M.J. 364 (C.A.A.F. 2015) (affirming death sentence), reconsideration denied, 75 M.J.
111 (C.A.A.F. 2015) (mem.), cert. denied. 137 S. Ct. 41 (2016)
73 M.J. 451 (C.A.A.F. 2014) (mem.) (granting joint motion for oral argument)

2
 73 M.J. 228 (C.A.A.F. 2014) (mem.) (granting in part motion to file brief in excess of 50
pages)
72 M.J. 408 (C.A.A.F. 2013) (mem.) (briefing order)
2012 CCA LEXIS 247, 2012 WL 2887230, ARMY 20050514 (A. Ct. Crim. App. July
13, 2012) (unpublished opinion affirming death sentence)
68 M.J. 207 (C.A.A.F. 2009) (order lifting stay of proceedings)
68 M.J. 201 (C.A.A.F. 2009) (order denying petitions for extraordinary relief without
prejudice to right to raise issues in normal course of review)
68 M.J. 154 (C.A.A.F. 2009) (show cause orders and orders staying appellate
proceedings)

3. United States v. Hennis (affirmed by A. Ct. Crim. App.; affirmed by CAAF; cert, denied;
pending presidential action) (Army, sentenced in 2010)
141 S. Ct. 1052 (2021) (mem.) (order denying certiorari)
80 M.J. 148 (C.A.A.F. 2020) (mem.) (mandate issued)
80 M.J. 145 (C.A.A.F. 2020) (mem.) (denying reconsideration)
80 M.J. 98 (C.A.A.F. 2020) (mem.) (granting appellant’s second motion to extend time to
file petition for reconsideration)
80 M.J. 84 (C.A.A.F. 2020) (mem.) (granting appellant’s motion to extend time to file
petition for reconsideration)
79 M.J. 370 (C.A.A.F. 2020) (affirming death sentence), reconsideration denied, 80 M.J.
145 (C.A.A.F. 2020)
79 M.J. 287 (C.A.A.F. 2019) (mem.) (granting appellant’s motion for two counsel to
present oral argument; denying motion for hearing in two sessions)
79 M.J. 257 (C.A.A.F. 2019) (mem.) (granting appellant’s motion for additional time for
oral argument; further expanding argument time to 60 minutes per side)
79 M.J. 234 (C.A.A.F. 2019) (mem.) (directing parties to consult regarding issues to be
orally argued and expanding argument time to 30 minutes per side)
79 M.J. 225 (C.A.A.F. 2019) (mem.) (granting appellant’s motion to file reply brief in
excess of page limitation)
79 M.J. 179 (C.A.A.F. 2019) (mem.) (granting appellant’s second motion to extend time
to file reply brief)
79 M.J. 158 (C.A.A.F. 2019) (mem.) (granting appellant’s motion to extend time to file
reply brief)
79 M.J. 151 (C.A.A.F. 2019) (mem.) (granting government’s motion to file brief in
excess of page limitations)
78 M.J. 421 (C.A.A.F. 2019) (mem.) (granting government’s motion to extend time to
file brief)
78 M.J. 308 (C.A.A.F. 2019) (mem.) (granting appellant’s motion to file oversized brief
of up to 250 pages; denying appellant’s motion for joint appendix exception)
78 M.J. 215 (C.A.A.F. 2018) (mem.) (granting appellant’s fourth motion to extend time
to file brief and noting that, absent extraordinary circumstances, no further extensions
will be granted)
78 M.J. 437 (C.A.A.F. 2018) (mem.) (granting appellant’s third motion to extend time to
file brief)

3
 77 M.J. 117 (C.A.A.F. 2017) (mem.) (briefing order)
77 M.J. 7 (C.A.A.F. 2017) (denying motion for funding for learned counsel and fact
investigator)
76 M.J. 167 (C.A.A.F. 2017) (mem.) (directing format of briefs)
76 M.J. 165 (C.A.A.F. 2017) (mem.) (noting filing of mandatory review case)
76 M.J. 45 (C.A.A.F. 2016) (mem.) (denying petition for writ of mandamus concerning
ACCA review of case without prejudice) (In re Timothy B. Hennis)
75 M.J. 796 (A. Ct. Crim. App. 2016) (en banc) (affirming death sentence)
2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 127734 (D. Kan. 2015) (dismissing without prejudice petition for
writ of habeas corpus)
74 M.J. 77 (C.A.A.F. 2014) (mem.) (denying without prejudice petition for writ of habeas
corpus)
73 M.J. 240 (C.A.A.F. 2014) (mem.) (denying without prejudice petition for writ of
habeas corpus) (Hennis v. Ledwith)
132 S. Ct. 2419 (2012) (order denying certiorari) (Hennis v. Hemlick)
666 F.3d 270 (4th Cir. 2012) (denying habeas relief) (Hennis v. Hemlick)
2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146565 (E.D.N.C. March 16, 2010) (dismissing petition for writ
of habeas corpus) (Hennis v. Hemlick)
67 M.J. 50 (C.A.A.F. 2008) (Hennis v. Parrish) (denying writ appeal without prejudice)

4. United States v. Hasan (affirmed by ACCA; pending briefing at CAAF) (Army, sentenced in
2013)
--- M.J. ----, 2021 WL 4724009 (C.A.A.F. Sept. 20, 2021) (mem.) (granting appellant’s
third motion to extend time to file brief)
--- M.J. ----, 2021 WL 3435015 (C.A.A.F. July 12, 2021) (mem.) (granting appellant’s
second motion to extend time to file brief)
81 M.J. 315 (C.A.A.F. 2021) (mem.) (granting appellant’s motion to examine sealed
appellate exhibits and sealed portion of trial transcript)
81 M.J. 296 (C.A.A.F. 2021) (mem.) (granting appellant’s motion to extend time to file
brief)
81 M.J. 238 (C.A.A.F. 2021) (mem.) (capital briefing order)
81 M.J. 174 (C.A.A.F. 2021) (mem.) (noting filing of mandatory review case)
81 M.J. 48 (C.A.A.F. 2021) (mem.) (granting motion to dismiss pro se petition for grant
of review without prejudice)
80 M.J. 480 (C.A.A.F. 2020) (mem.) (noting filing of mandatory review case)
80 M.J. 682 (A. Ct. Crim. App. 2020) (en banc) (affirming death sentence)
80 M.J. 391 (C.A.A.F. 2020) (mem.) (denying petition for writ of prohibition) (Hasan v.
United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals)
80 M.J. 391 (C.A.A.F. 2020) (mem.) (denying petition for writ of mandamus) (Hasan v.
United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals)
79 M.J. 293 (C.A.A.F. 2019) (mem.) (denying motion to stay proceedings as moot)
(Hasan v. ACCA)
79 M.J. 293 (C.A.A.F. 2019) (mem.) (denying petition for extraordinary relief regarding
appointment of chief judge without prejudice) (Hasan v. ACCA)
79 M.J. 292 (C.A.A.F. 2019) (mem.) (granting petition for extraordinary relief regarding

4
 recusal of appellate judges as to one judge and denying without prejudice as to a second
judge) (Hasan v. ACCA)
79 M.J. 81 (C.A.A.F. 2019) (mem.) (denying petition for reconsideration of April 18,
2019 order) (Hasan v. United States)
79 M.J. 67 (C.A.A.F. 2019) (mem.) (denying petition for reconsideration of April 2, 2019
order) (Hasan v. United States)
79 M.J. 46 (C.A.A.F. 2019) (mem.) (denying Hasan’s appellate defense counsel’s
petition for writ of mandamus to review sealed attorney-client privileged matters) (Hasan
v. United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals)
79 M.J. 29 (C.A.A.F. 2019) (mem.) (denying petition for writ of mandamus due to failure
to demonstrate relief cannot be obtained by other means) (Hasan v. United States Army
Court of Criminal Appeals)
78 M.J. 346 (C.A.A.F. 2019) (mem.) (ordering further briefing on CAAF’s jurisdiction to
grant extraordinary relief) (Hasan v. United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals)
78 M.J. 267 (C.A.A.F. 2019) (mem.) (show cause order and order directing briefing on
jurisdiction) (Hasan v. United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals)
72 M.J. 2 (C.A.A.F. 2012) (mem.) (order lifting stay) (Hasan v. Gross)
71 M.J. 416 (C.A.A.F. 2012) (granting writ appeal) (Hasan v. Gross)
71 M.J. 448 (C.A.A.F. 2012) (mem.) (granting stay of proceedings) (Hasan v. Gross)
2012 CCA LEXIS 399 (A. Ct. Crim. App. Oct. 18, 2012) (denying petition for writ of
prohibition and petition for writ of mandamus) (Hasan v. United States)
71 M.J. 386 (C.A.A.F. 2012) (mem.) (lifting stay and denying petition for writ of
prohibition without prejudice) (Hasan v. Gross)
71 M.J. 382 (C.A.A.F. 2012) (mem.) (granting stay of proceedings) (Hasan v. Gross)
71 M.J. 380 (C.A.A.F. Aug. 10, 2012) (mem.) (denying writ appeal) (Hasan v. Gross)
2012 CCA LEXIS 217 (A. Ct. Crim. App. June 22, 2012) (denying petition for
extraordinary relief without prejudice) (Hasan v. United States)

B. Cases in which the death sentence has been set aside and can no longer be reimposed

1. United States v. Walker (no longer under death sentence) (Marine Corps, originally sentenced
in 1993)
66 M.J. 721 (N-M. Ct. Crim. App. 2008) (setting aside premeditation element of one of
two premeditated murder findings, setting aside finding of guilty to robbery, and setting
aside the sentence due to erroneous denial of a defense continuance request to
adequately prepare a substitute expert witness)
60 M.J. 354 (C.A.A.F. 2004) (granting in part petition for extraordinary relief concerning
the appointment and composition of the Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals
panel hearing Walker’s appeal)

2. United States v. Kreutzer (no longer under death sentence) (Army, originally sentenced in
1996)
61 M.J. 272 (C.A.A.F. 2005) (affirming Army Court’s reversal of contested findings and
the sentence)

5
 60 M.J. 453 (C.A.A.F. 2005) (extraordinary writ ordering Kreutzer’s removal from death
row)
certificate filed, 60 M.J. 133 (C.A.A.F. 2004)
59 M.J. 773 (A. Ct. Crim. App. 2004) (reversing contested findings due to failure to
provide a mitigation specialist and reversing death sentence due to ineffective assistance
of counsel)

3. United States v. Murphy (no longer under death sentence) (Army, originally sentenced in
1987)
petition denied, 67 M.J. 245 (C.A.A.F. 2009)
67 M.J. 514 (A. Ct. Crim. App. 2008) (holding that IAC affected only the sentence and
not the findings and remanding case for rehearing on the sentence)
56 M.J. 642 (A. Ct. Crim. App. 2001) (ordering DuBay hearing)
50 M.J. 4 (C.A.A.F. 1998) (reversing death sentence due to ineffective assistance of
counsel)
40 M.J. 288 (C.M.A. 1994) (order concerning briefing schedule)
40 M.J. 14 (C.M.A. 1994) (order concerning appellate counsel)
39 M.J. 437 (C.M.A. 1994) (order concerning continuity of appellate counsel)
36 M.J. 1137 (A.C.M.R. 1993) (en banc) (affirming death sentence)
36 M.J. 8 (C.M.A. 1992) (remanding case to ACMR for proportionality review)
34 M.J. 310 (Murphy v. Judges of U.S. Army Court of Military Review) (C.M.A. 1992)
(per curiam) (remanding case to ACMR)
30 M.J. 1040 (A.C.M.R. 1990) (en banc) (affirming death sentence)

4. United States v. Thomas (no longer under death sentence) (Marine Corps, originally
sentenced in 1988)
46 M.J. 311 (C.A.A.F. 1997) (setting aside death penalty due to error in instructions)
43 M.J. 466 (C.A.A.F. 1996) (order) (setting format for capital appellate brief)
43 M.J. 550 (N-M. Ct. Crim. App. 1995) (en banc) (affirming death sentence)
39 M.J. 626 (N-M.C.M.R. 1993) (rejecting challenge to member voting issue)
33 M.J. 768 (N-M.C.M.R. 1991) (denying petition for funds to hire ABA-qualified
counsel)
33 M.J. 644 (N-M.C.M.R. 1991) (denying petition for funds to hire background
investigator)

5. United States v. Dock (no longer under death sentence) (Army, originally sentenced in 1984)
28 M.J. 117 (C.M.A. 1989) (affirming relief by ACMR)
26 M.J. 620 (A.C.M.R. 1988) (en banc) (setting aside findings and sentence)

6. United States v. Curtis (no longer under death sentence) (Marine Corps, originally sentenced
in 1987)
52 M.J. 166 (C.A.A.F. 1999) (per curiam) (affirming N-M. Ct. Crim. App. ruling setting
aside death sentence)
1998 CCA LEXIS 493 (N-M. Ct. Crim. App. Nov. 30, 1998) (en banc) (per curiam)
(setting aside death sentence and affirming sentence of confinement for life)

6
 48 M.J. 331 (C.A.A.F. 1997) (order denying reconsideration)
46 M.J. 129 (C.A.A.F. 1997) (per curiam) (reversing death sentence on ineffective
assistance of counsel grounds)
44 M.J. 106 (C.A.A.F. 1996) (affirming death sentence)
38 M.J. 530 (N-M.C.M.R. 1993) (en banc) (affirming death sentence)
33 M.J. 101 (C.M.A. 1991) (remanding case to NMCMR), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 1097
(1992)
32 M.J. 252 (C.M.A.) (resolving systemic challenges to military death penalty), cert.
denied, 502 U.S. 952 (1991)
31 M.J. 395 (C.M.A. 1990) (ordering funding for the defense), clarified and amended, 31
M.J. 434 (C.M.A. 1990)
28 M.J. 1074 (N-M.C.M.R. 1989) (en banc) (affirming death sentence)

7. United States v. Simoy (no longer under death sentence) (Air Force, originally sentenced in
1992)
50 M.J. 1 (C.A.A.F. 1998) (reversing death sentence due to error in instructions)
46 M.J. 382 (C.A.A.F. 1997) (order) (setting format for capital appellate brief)
46 M.J. 592 (A.F. Ct. Crim. App. 1996) (en banc) (affirming death sentence)

8. United States v. Quintanilla (no longer under death sentence) (Marine Corps, originally
sentenced in 1996)
549 U.S. 886 (2006) (order denying certiorari)
63 M.J. 283 (C.A.A.F. 2006) (order denying reconsideration)
63 M.J. 29 (C.A.A.F. 2006) (affirming reversal of sentence; reversing reversal of
findings)
petition granted, 61 M.J. 470 (C.A.A.F. 2005)
certificate filed, 61 M.J. 72 (C.A.A.F. 2005)
60 M.J. 852 (N-M. Ct. Crim. App. 2005) (reversing findings and sentence due to military
judge erroneously granting a government challenge for cause against a member)

9. United States v. Parker (no longer under death sentence) (Marine Corps, originally sentenced
in 1993)
71 M.J. 594 (N-M. Ct. Crim. App. 2012) (setting aside one of two premeditated murder
convictions as factually insufficient and reassessing sentence to confinement for life)
69 M.J. 429 (C.A.A.F. 2010) (sub nom United States v. Navy-Marine Corps Court of
Criminal Appeals) (lifting stay and denying United States’ petition for writ of mandamus
to stop DuBay hearing ordered by NMCCA)
69 M.J. 398 (C.A.A.F. 2010) (granting United States’ motion for stay of DuBay hearing
ordered by NMCCA)
Unpublished NMCCA order, NMCCA No. 95-0100 (Aug. 31, 2010), available at
http://www.caaflog.com/wp-content/uploads/Parker-31Aug2010-DuBay-order.pdf
(ordering new DuBay hearing)
65 M.J. 626 (N-M. Ct. Crim. App. 2007) (ordering DuBay hearing concerning Atkins
issue)
61 M.J. 63 (C.A.A.F. 2005) (ordering N-M. Ct. Crim. App. to consider mental retardation

7
 issue)
60 M.J. 446 (C.A.A.F. 2005) (show cause order)

10. United States v. Loving (Army, sentenced in 1989) (President commuted death sentence on
Jan. 17, 2017)
68 M.J. 1 (C.A.A.F. 2009) (Loving v. United States) (denying habeas relief)
64 M.J. 132 (C.A.A.F. 2006) (Loving v. United States) (ordering DuBay hearing to
resolve ineffective assistance of counsel claim)
62 M.J. 235 (C.A.A.F. 2005) (rejecting petition for writ of error coram nobis)
54 M.J. 459 (C.A.A.F.), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 949 (2001) (rejecting petition for
reconsideration)
47 M.J. 438 (C.A.A.F.), reconsideration denied, 49 M.J. 387 (C.A.A.F), cert. denied, 525
U.S. 1040 (1998) (Loving v. Hart) (rejecting writ appeal challenging death sentence)
517 U.S. 748 (1996) (Loving v. United States) (rejecting constitutional challenge to
military death penalty)
41 M.J. 213 (C.A.A.F. 1994) (affirming death sentence), reconsideration granted in part,
denied in part, 42 M.J. 109 (C.A.A.F. 1995).
34 M.J. 1065 (A.C.M.R. 1992) (denying petition for reconsideration)
34 M.J. 956 (A.C.M.R.) (affirming death sentence)

11. United States v. Witt (death sentence reversed; sentencing to confinement for life without
eligibility for parole on resentencing) (Air Force, sentenced in 2005; resentenced in 2018)
75 M.J. 380 (C.A.A.F. 2016) (vacating AFCCA decision on reconsideration and
reinstating AFCCA decision setting aside death sentence)
75 M.J. 343 (C.A.A.F. 2016) (mem.) (denying government motion to specify issue)
75 M.J. 115 (C.A.A.F. 2015) (mem.) (specifying issues for briefing)
75 M.J. 17 (C.A.A.F. 2014) (mem.) (ordering that joint appendix be filed in both paper
and electronic formats)
73 M.J. 738 (A.F. Ct. Crim. App. 2014) (en banc) (on reconsideration, affirming death
sentence), vacated, 75 M.J. 380 (C.A.A.F. 2016)
73 M.J. 78 (C.A.A.F. 2013) (mem.) (granting government motion to dismiss petition
without prejudice)
72 M.J. 727 (A.F. Ct. Crim. App. 2013) (en banc) (reversing death sentence)
70 M.J. 383 (C.A.A.F. 2011) (mem.) (In re Witt & Takara) (order denying petition for
extraordinary relief)
67 M.J. 371 (C.A.A.F. 2009) (mem.) (In re Andrew P. Witt) (order denying petition for
extraordinary relief)

Cases Concerning Rape as a Capital Offense

Kennedy v. Louisiana
554 U.S. 945 (2008) (reserving judgment on the constitutionality of a death sentence
for the crime of rape under the Uniform Code of Military Justice)

Willengbring v. Neurauter
48 M.J. 152, 180 (C.A.A.F. 1998) (holding rape is an “offense punishable by death” for

8
 purposes of exempting it from the 5-year statute of limitations of Article 43(c)(1))

United States v. Mangahas

77 M.J. 220 (C.A.A.F. 2017) (holding that rape of an adult woman was not a death-
eligible offense for statute of limitations purposes)

United States v. Gonzales

46 M.J. 667 (N-M. Ct. Crim. App. 1997) (holding rape “may be tried at any time without
limitation”; declining to resolve whether military death penalty for rape is constitutional
under Coker v. Georgia, 433 U.S. 584 (1977)), aff’d, 51 M.J. 306 (1999) (mem.)

United States v. Straight

42 M.J. 244 (C.A.A.F. 1995) (holding defense counsel waived challenge to permissibility
of capital referral in rape/attempted murder case)

[briefing in SCOTUS’s pending case of United States v. Briggs, 19-108, raises the issue of
whether rape can be a capital offense in the military notwithstanding Kennedy v. Louisiana and
Coker v. Georgia]

Select Pre-R.C.M. 1004 Era Military Death Penalty Cases

Schick v. Reed
419 U.S. 256 (1974) (holding President could commute military death sentence to life
without parole even absent congressional authority to do so)

Burns v. Wilson
346 U.S. 137 (1953) (holding Article III courts can exercise habeas jurisdiction over
individuals sentenced by court-martial, but declining to grant relief to condemned
airmen)

United States v. Matthews

16 M.J. 354 (C.M.A. 1983) (holding military death penalty unconstitutional)

Treatises

2 FRANCIS A. GILLIGAN & FREDRIC I. LEDERER, COURT-MARTIAL PROCEDURE § 23-32.10 (4th

ed. 2015)

2 DAVID A. SCHLUETER, MILITARY CRIMINAL JUSTICE: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE §§ 16-

17(B), 16-20(B)(5) (10th ed. 2018)

Select R.C.M. 1004-Era Military Death Penalty Articles

David A. Anderson, Spying in Violation of Article 106, UCMJ: The Offense and the
Constitutionality of Its Mandatory Death Penalty, 127 MIL. L. REV. 1 (1990)

9
David C. Baldus, Catherine M. Grosso, George Woodworth & Richard Newell, Racial
Discrimination in the Administration of the Death Penalty: The Experience of the United States
Armed Forces (1984-2005), 101 J. CRIM. L. & CRIMINOLOGY 1227 (2012)

Erin Michele Baxter, Comment, Capital Punishment in the Military--America v. China: An

Essay on the Policy Considerations, Similarities and Differences, 7 TULSA J. COMP. & INT’L L.
227 (1999)

Fred L. Borch III, Book Review: The Fifth Field: The Story of 96 American Soldiers Sentenced
to Death and Executed in Europe and North Africa in World War II, 219 MIL. L. REV. 285
(2014)

Fred L. Borch III, Lore of the Corps: Hangings and Death by Musketry in the Pacific: Death
Penalty Courts-Martial in Australia, Hawaii, and India (1942-1947), ARMY LAW., June 2015, at
1

Fred L. Borch III, Lore of the Corps: A Murder in Manila – and a Hanging, ARMY LAW., May
2016, at 1

Fred L. Borch III, Lore of the Corps: Tried by Military Commission and Hanged for Murder:
United States v. Franz Strasser, ARMY LAW., March 2014, at 71

LTC Eric Carpenter, An Overview of the Capital Jury Project for Military Justice Practitioners:
Aggravation, Mitigation, and Admission Defenses, Army Law., July 2011, at 16

LTC Eric Carpenter, An Overview of the Capital Jury Project for Military Justice Practitioners:
Jury Dynamics, Juror Confusion, and Juror Responsibility, Army Law., May 2011, at 6

William R. Cauley, Recent Development: Stuck Between a CAAF and a Hard Place: The
Coram Nobis Petition of Private Ronald Gray and the Weakening of Military Justice, 97 N.C.L.
REV. 995 (2019)

Jonathan Choa, Note, Civilians, Service-Members and the Death Penalty: The Failure of
Article 25a to Require Twelve-Member Panels in Capital Trials for Non-Military Crimes, 70
FORDHAM L. REV. 2065 (2002)

Stephen Cox, Comment, The Military Death Penalty: Implications for Indigent Service
Members, 3 LOY. POVERTY L. J. 165 (1997)

Walter T. Cox, III, et al., Report of the Commission on the 50th Anniversary of the Uniform
Code of Military Justice, § IIIC (May 2001), reprinted with commentary at Kevin J. Barry, A
Face Lift (And Much More) for an Aging Beauty: The Cox Commission Recommendations to
Rejuvenate the Uniform Code of Military Justice, 2002 L. REV. MICH. ST. U.-DETROIT C.L. 57,
109-12

10
Christine Daniels, Note, Capital Punishment and the Courts-Martial: Questions Surfacing
Following Loving v. United States, 55 WASH. & LEE L. REV. 577 (1998)

Rich Federico, The Unusual Punishment: A Call for Congress to Abolish the Death Penalty
Under the Uniform Code of Military Justice for Unique Military, Non-Homicide Offenses, 18
BERKELEY J. CRIM. L. 1 (2013)

Mary M. Foreman, Military Capital Litigation: Meeting the Heightened Standards of United
States v. Curtis, 174 MIL. L. REV. 1 (2002)

Lieutenant Colonel David J.R. Frakt, Capital Referral Decision: Decision to Seek Death: A
Field Guide to Advising Convening Authorities on the Capital Referral Decision, THE
REPORTER, Jan. 2015, at 14

Catherine M. Grosso, David C. Baldus & George G. Woodworth, The Impact of Civilian
Aggravating Circumstances on the Military Death Penalty (1984-2005): Another Chapter in the
Resistance of the Armed Forces to the Civilianization of Military Justice, 43 U. MICH. J.L.
REFORM 569 (2010)

Catherine M. Grosso, David C. Baldus & George Woodworth, The Role of Intimacy in the
Prosecution and Sentencing of Capital Murder Cases in the U.S. Armed Forces, 1984-2005, 40
N.M. L. REV. 273 (2010)

Daniel Harvey, Referral of Charges in Military Capital Litigation: A “Critical Stage”?, 12 GEO.
MASON U. CIV. R.L.J. 271 (2002)

Alexander J. Hendricks, Note, A Global Network for Treason: The Internet’s Impermissible
Broadening of the Class of Death-Eligible Defendants under § 904 of the Uniform Code of
Military Justice, 24 CORNELL J. L. & PUB. POL’Y 353 (2014)

W. Walker Hobby, Note, A Rough Form of Justice: Constitutional Boundaries on Capital

Punishment Under the UCMJ, 97 TEX. L. REV. 1163 (2019)

LT Jessica Hudson, ENS Kyle Fralick & 1stLt John A. Sautter, Lightening But No Thunder: The
Need for Clarity in Military Courts Regarding the Definition of Mental Retardation in Capital
Cases and for Procedures in Implementing Atkins v. Virginia, 55 NAVAL L. REV. 359 (2008)

Gregory F. Intoccia, Constitutionality of the Death Penalty Under the Uniform Code of Military
Justice, 32 A.F.L. REV. 415 (1990)

Robert T. Jackson, Jr., Death--An Excessive Penalty for Rape of a Child?, ARMY LAW., Sept.
1986, at 37

Nicole E. Jaeger, Note, Maybe Soldiers Have Rights After All!, 87 J. CRIM L. & CRIMINOL. 895

11
(1997)

Frank E. Kostik Jr., If I Have to Fight For My Life – Shouldn’t I Get to Choose My Own
Strategy? An Argument to Overturn the Uniform Code of Military Justice’s Ban on Guilty Pleas
in Capital Cases, 220 MIL. L. REV. 242 (2014)

Janae M. Lepir, Hypothetically Speaking: The Constitutional Parameters of Capital Voir Dire
in the Military after Morgan v. Illinois, 225 MIL. L. REV. 375 (2017)

J. Robert Lilly & J. Michael Thomson, Executing US Soldiers in England, World War II, 37
BRIT. J. CRIMINOL. 262 (1997)

J. Robert Lilly, Dirty Details: Executing U.S. Soldiers During World War II, 42 CRIME &
DELINQUENCY 491 (1996)

J. Robert Lilly, US Military Executions, 90 AFTER THE BATTLE 50 (1995)

Colonel (Retired) French L. Maclean, The Seventh Annual George S. Prugh Lecture in Military
Legal History, 219 MIL. L. REV. 262 (2014)

J. Michael Montgomery, Death Is Different: Kreutzer and the Right to a Mitigation Specialist in
Military Capital Offense Cases, ARMY LAW., Feb. 2007, at 13

Gary D. Null, Air Force Executions, THE REPORTER, March 1996, at 33

John F. O’Connor, Don’t Know Much About History: The Constitution, Historical Practice, and
the Death Penalty Jurisdiction of Courts-Martial, 52 U. MIAMI L. REV. 177 (1997)

Mark R. Owens, Note, Loving v. United States: Private Dwight Loving Fights a Battle for His
Life Using Separation of Powers as His Defense, 7 WIDENER J. PUBLIC L. 287 (1998)

John E. Parkerson & Carolyn S. Stoehr, The U.S. Military Death Penalty in Europe: Threats
from Recent European Human Rights Development, 129 MIL. L. REV. 41 (1990)

Stephen C. Reyes, Dusty Gallows: The Executive of Private Bennett and the Modern Capital
Court-Martial, 62 NAVAL L. REV. 103 (2013).

Lieutenant Commander Stephen C. Reyes, Left Out in the Cold: The Case for a Learned
Counsel Requirement in the Military, ARMY LAW., Oct. 2010, at 4

Meredith L. Robinson, Note, Volunteers for the Death Penalty? The Application of Solorio v.
United States to Military Capital Litigation, 6 GEO. MASON L. REV. 1049 (1998)

Captain Douglas L. Simon, Making Sense of Cruel and Unusual Punishment: A New Approach
to Reconciling Military and Civilian Eighth Amendment Law, 184 MIL. L. REV. 66 (2005)

12
Clark Smith, Fair and Impartial? Military Jurisdiction and the Decision to Seek the Death
Penalty, 5 U. MIAMI NAT’L SEC. & ARMED CONF. L. REV. 1 (2015)

Michael I. Spak, It’s Time to Put the Military’s Death Penalty to Sleep, 49 CLEV. ST. L. REV. 41
(2001)

Kevin K. Spradling & Kevin K. Murphy, Capital Punishment, the Constitution, and the Uniform
Code of Military Justice, 32 A.F.L. REV. 415 (1990)

Russell Stetler, Mitigation Evidence in Death Penalty Cases, THE CHAMPION, Jan./Feb. 1999, at
35

Annamary Sullivan, The President’s Power to Promulgate Death Penalty Standards, 125 MIL.
L. REV. 143 (1989)

Dwight H. Sullivan, Killing Time: Two Decades of Military Capital Litigation, 189 MIL. L.
REV. 1 (2006)

Dwight H. Sullivan, Jerry L. Brittain, Michael N. Knowlan & Cheryl Pettry, Raising the Bar:
Mitigation Specialists in Military Capital Litigation, 12 GEO. MASON U. CIV. R.L.J. 199 (2002)

Dwight H. Sullivan, Executive Branch Consideration of Military Death Sentences, 1 J. MIL. &
VET. L. 24 (1999), updated and reprinted in EVOLVING MILITARY JUSTICE 137 (Eugene R.
Fidell & Dwight H. Sullivan eds., 2002)

Dwight H. Sullivan, Playing the Numbers: Court-Martial Panel Size and the Military Death
Penalty, 158 MIL. L. REV. 1 (1998)

Dwight H. Sullivan, A Matter of Life and Death: Examining the Military Death Penalty’s
Fairness, FED. LAW., June 1998, at 38

Dwight Sullivan, Military Death Row: Separate, Not Equal, NAT'L L.J., Nov. 6, 1995, at A19

Dwight H. Sullivan, The Last Line of Defense: Federal Habeas Review of Military Death
Penalty Cases, 144 MIL. L. REV. 1 (1994)

Joshua M. Toman, Time to Kill: Euthanizing the Requirement for Presidential Approval of
Military Death Sentences to Restore Finality of Legal Review, 195 MIL. L. REV. 1 (2008)

Paul H. Turney, New Developments in Military Capital Litigation: Four Cases Highlight the
Fundamentals, ARMY LAW., May 2000, at 103

David D. Velloney, Balancing the Scales of Justice: Expanding Access to Mitigation Specialists
in Military Death Penalty Cases, 170 MIL. L. REV. 1 (2001)

13
Mark A. Visger, The Impact of Ring v. Arizona on Military Capital Sentencing, ARMY LAW.,
Sept. 2005, at 71

Cody M. Weston, Note, United States v. Loving: The Resurrection of Military Capital
Punishment, 77 OR. L. REV. 365 (1998)

Ryan T. Yoder, Winning the Battle and the War: Why the Military Services Should Appoint
Capital Defense Attorneys from a Hybrid Panel, 226 MIL. L. REV. 264 (2018)

14