DocketNumber: 99-0399-MC
Citation Numbers: 53 M.J. 99, 2000 CAAF LEXIS 569, 2000 WL 744127
Judges: Effron, Sullivan, Gierke, Cox, Crawford
Filed Date: 6/9/2000
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 11/9/2024
(concurring in the result):
Appellant is entitled to no relief. He neither exhausted his administrative remedies to complain of his allegedly onerous confinement conditions, nor sought judicial relief at his court-martial. Accordingly, he waived the issue. See United States v. Miller, 46 MJ 248, 250 (1997)(appellant must show he exhausted either the prisoner-grievance procedure or Article 138, UCMJ, 10 USC § 938, remedies, or unusual circumstances exist justifying failure to pursue and exhaust); United States v. Huffman, 40 MJ 225 (CMA 1994)(Crawford and Gierke, JJ., dissenting in part and concurring in the result)(failure to raise pretrial punishment at trial generally waives the matter); United States v. Coffey, 38 MJ 290, 291 (CMA 1993)(a prisoner seeking judicial intervention to resolve a cruel and unusual punishment claim must first exhaust available administrative relief). Accordingly, I join in the decision to affirm the Court of Criminal Appeals.