b. Bergdahl Appellate Litigation

This page follows the appellate litigation of this case, which as of the moment all petitions for extraordinary writ.

On 3 December 2015, Hearst News submitted a somewhat tart reply to the government's opposition to the Hearst News, et. al. v. Abrams, et. al.

On 21 November 2015, counsel submitted a motion for expedited hearing in Bergdahl v. Burke.

On 23 November2015, The CAAF ruled on a motion for expedited hearing in Bergdahl v. Burke.  Writ-appeal petition denied.

On 23 October 2015, the government filed its answer to the writ appeal petition at CAAF.

On 22 October 2015, NBC News filed an amicus in Bergdahl v Burke, et. al.

On 14 October 2015, the National Institute of Military Justice (NIMJ) filed an amicus curiae brief in Bergdahl v. Burke, a writ-appeal petition pending at CAAF.

On 14 October 2015, the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) filed an amicus curiae brief in Bergdahl v. Burke.

On 14 October 2015, the Army Court of Criminal Appeals (ACCA) dismissed the writ petition in Hearst, et. al. v. Burke, et. al.

On 23 October 2015, the government filed its answer to the writ appeal petition at CAAF.

On 22 October 2015, NBC News filed an amicus in Bergdahl v Burke, et. al.

On 14 October 2015, the National Institute of Military Justice (NIMJ) filed an amicus curiae brief in Bergdahl v. Burke, a writ-appeal petition pending at CAAF.

On 14 October 2015, the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) filed an amicus curiae brief in Bergdahl v. Burke.

On 14 October 2015, the Army Court of Criminal Appeals (ACCA) dismissed the writ petition in Hearst, et. al. v. Burke, et. al.

5 June 2015, Writ Appeal Petition, Bergdahl v. Milley, at CAAF. Sergeant Bergdahl seeks to disqualify General Milley as the convening authority under the theory that he is an accuser in the case. The decision of the ACCA denying the petition is at page 17 of the .pdf.

7 July 2015, at CAAF: No. 15-0616/AR. Robert B. Bergdahl v. Mark R. Milley, General, U.S. Army, in his official capacity as Commanding General, U.S. Army Forces Command and General Court-Martial Convening Authority. CCA 20150383. On consideration of the writ-appeal petition, and the motions filed by Alfredo N. Foster, Jr., Esq., and Franklin D. Rosenblatt, Esq., to appear pro hac vice, said motions are granted. The writ-appeal petition is hereby denied without prejudice to Appellant's right to raise the issue asserted during the course of normal appellate review.

22 July 2015, Writ Appeal Petition, Bergdahl v. Burke, at CAAF.

21 August 2015, at CAAF: No. 15-0710/AR. Robert B. Bergdahl, Appellant v. Peter Q. Burke, Lieutenant Colonel, AG, U.S. Army, in his official capacity as Commander, Special Troops Battalion, U.S. Army Forces Command, Fort Bragg, NC, and Special Court-Martial Convening Authority and United States, Appellees. CCA 20150463. On consideration of the writ-appeal petition, it is ordered that said writ-appeal petition is hereby denied without prejudice to Appellant's right to raise the issue asserted during the course of normal appellate review.

On 17 September 2015, Sergeant Robert Bergdahl petitioned ACCA for extraordinary relief in the nature of a writ of mandamus. Specifically, petitioner asks this court to direct the respondent, the special court-martial convening authority, to: 1) make public forthwith the unclassified exhibits that have been received in evidence in the accused's preliminary hearing; and 2) modify the protective order to permit the accused to make those exhibits public.

21 September 2015, Petition in Bergdahl v. Burke, seeking a writ of mandamus.

22 September 2015, ACCA Show Cause Order.

25 September 2015, Brief of Center for Constitutional Rights, as amicus in support of Bergdahl.

29 September 2015, Government response to petition for writ of mandamus in Bergdahl v. Burke. The issue is “Once an unclassified document has been accepted in evidence in a preliminary hearing open to the public, must the convening authority release it and permit the accused to do so? Some of the relevant documents can be found as attachments here,including the “offending” protective order.

30 September 2015, Bergdahl’s Reply to the Government brief.

2 October 2015, Hearst Newspapers, LLC, et. al. v. Abrams, et. at., Petition for Extraordinary Relief.

The petition raises three issues.

I. The Public Has A Constitutional Right of Contemporaneous Access To Judicial Records In Military Proceedings, Including Evidence And Transcripts.

II. Respondents’ Denial of Access In This Case Cannot BeReconciled With Established Precedents Governing Sealing.

III. Respondents Have Authority To Release The Requested Document.

2 October 2015, Bergdahl’s Motion to Intervene in Hearst, et. al.

8 October 2015. Army Court of Criminal Appeals (ACCA) denied a writ petition in Bergdahl v. Burke.

On 17 September 2015, Sergeant Robert Bergdahl petitioned this court for extraordinaryrelief in the nature of a writ of mandamus. Specifically, petitioner asks this court to direct the respondent, the special court-martial convening authority, to: 1) make public forthwith the unclassified exhibits that have been received in evidence in the accused's preliminary hearing; and 2) modify the protective order to permit the accused to make those exhibits public. For the reasons below, the petition is dismissed.

On 12 October 2015, counsel for Bergdahl filed this writ appeal petition with the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF) in Bergdahl v. Burke.