Supplement to Petition for Grant of Review

(a) Review on petition for grant of review requires a showing of good cause. Good cause should be shown by the appellant in the supplement to the petition, which must state with particularity the error(s) claimed to be materially prejudicial to the substantial rights of the appellant. See Article 59(a), UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 859(a). (b) The supplement to the petition must be filed in accordance with the applicable time limit set forth in Rule 19(a)(5), must include an Appendix containing an official copy of the decision of the Court of Criminal Appeals, and must conform to the provisions of Rules 35A and 37. Unless authorized by Order of the Court or by motion of a party granted by the Court, the supplement and any answer thereto may not exceed 9,000 words. Any reply to the answer may not exceed 4,500 words. The supplement must contain: (1) A statement of the errors assigned for review by the Court, expressed concisely; (2) A statement of statutory jurisdiction, including: (A) The statutory basis of the Court of Criminal Appeals jurisdiction; (B) The statutory basis upon which the Court’s jurisdiction is invoked; (3) A statement of the case setting forth a concise chronology, including all relevant dates. The chronology must specify: (A) the results of the trial; (B) the actions of the intermediate reviewing authorities and the Court of Criminal Appeals; (C) the disposition of a petition for reconsideration or rehearing, if filed; and (D) any other pertinent information regarding the proceedings, including, if set forth in the record, the date when service upon the accused of the decision of the Court of Criminal Appeals was effected; (4) A statement of the facts of the case material to the errors assigned, including specific page references to each relevant portion of the record of trial; 19 (5) A direct and concise argument showing why there is good cause to grant the petition, demonstrating with particularity why the errors assigned are materially prejudicial to the substantial rights of the appellant. Where applicable, the supplement to the petition must indicate whether the court below has: (A) decided a question of law that has not been, but should be, settled by this Court; (B) decided a question of law in a way that conflicts with applicable decisions of (i) the Court, (ii) the Supreme Court of the United States, (iii) another Court of Criminal Appeals, (iv) another panel of the same Court of Criminal Appeals, or (v) a United States Circuit Court of Appeals; (C) adopted a rule of law materially different from that generally recognized in the trial of criminal cases in the United States District Courts; (D) decided the validity of a provision of the Constitution, the UCMJ or other act of Congress, the Manual for Courts-Martial, United States, a service regulation, a rule of court or a custom of the service the validity of which was directly drawn into question in that court; (E) decided the case (i) en banc or (ii) by divided vote; (F) so far departed from the accepted and usual course of judicial proceedings, or so far sanctioned such a departure by a court-martial or other person acting under the authority of the UCMJ, as to warrant review by the Court; or (G) taken inadequate corrective action after remand by the Court subsequent to grant of an earlier petition in the same case and that appellant wishes to seek review from the Supreme Court of the United States specifying the issue or issues on which certiorari review would be sought, whether related to the remand or to the original decision by this Court. (Effective Dec. 22, 2024, pursuant to the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024, Pub. L. No. 118-31, §533(a)(1), (b), 137 Stat. 261 (2023), Rule 21(b)(5)(G) is amended to: “(G) taken inadequate corrective action after remand by the Court subsequent to grant of an earlier petition in the same case.”) (6) A supplement submitted under this Rule must include a certificate stating that the number of words in the supplement complies with the applicable type-volume limitations of this Rule and Rule 37. Headings, footnotes, and quotations count toward the word limitation. The index, table of cases, statutes, and other relevant authorities, the appendix and any certificates of counsel do not count toward the limitation. (c)(1) Answer / Reply in Article 62, UCMJ, Appeals. An appellee’s answer to the supplement to the petition for grant of review in an Article 62, UCMJ, case must be filed no later than fourteen days after the filing of such supplement. An appellant may file a reply no later than seven days after the filing of the appellee’s answer. (2) Answer / Reply in Other Appeals. An appellee’s answer to the supplement to the petition for grant of review in all other appeal cases may be filed no later than twenty- 20 one days after the filing of such supplement (see Rule 21(e)). As a discretionary alternative if a formal answer is waived, an appellee may file with the Clerk a short letter, within fourteen days after the filing of the appellant’s supplement to the petition, setting forth one of the following alternative positions: (i) that the United States submits a general opposition to the assigned error(s) of law and relies on its brief filed with the Court of Criminal Appeals; or (ii) that the United States does not oppose the granting of the petition (for some specific reason, such as an error involving an unsettled area of the law). An appellant may file a reply no later than seven days after the filing of the appellee’s answer or answer letter. (d) The Court may, in its discretion, examine the record in any case for the purpose of determining whether there appears to be plain error not assigned by the appellant. The Court may then specify and grant review of any such errors as well as any assigned errors that merit review. (e) Where no specific errors are assigned in the supplement to the petition, the Court will review the petition without awaiting an answer thereto. See Rule 19(a)(5). (f) An appellant may move to withdraw a petition at any time by filing a motion pursuant to Rule 30. Such a motion must be accompanied by a written request for withdrawal that includes the following: (1) A statement that the appellant and counsel for the appellant have discussed the appellant’s right to appellate review, the effect of the withdrawal, and that the appellant understands these matters; (2) A statement that the motion to withdraw the petition is submitted voluntarily and cannot be revoked; (3) The signatures of the appellant and counsel for the appellant.