No. 16-961October Term 2017Decided Jun 22, 2018
Dalmazzi v. United States
The case centered on Supreme Court review of military appeals and on whether one military judge could serve on two courts at once.
Case status
- Current stage
- Decided
- Latest event
- Decision released Jun 22, 2018
- What it's about
This case involved challenges to Judge Martin T. Mitchell’s service on two military courts at the same time: the U.S. Court of Military Commission Review and the U.S. Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals. The petitioners argued that his dual service was unlawful under the Constitution and federal law, and also disputed whether the Supreme Court had jurisdiction and whether the military appeals court wrongly treated some claims as moot.
Question presented
1. WHETHER THIS COURT HAS JURISDICTION TO REVIEW THE CASES IN NOS. 16-961 AND 16-1017 UNDER 28 U. S. C. § 1259(3)? 2. Whether the Court of Appeals erred in holding that Petitioner's claims were moot? 3. Whether Judge Mitchell's service on the CMCR disqualified him from continuing to serve on the AFCCA under 10 U.S.C. § 973(b)(2)(A)(ii)? 4. Whether Judge Mitchell's simultaneous service on both the CMCR and the AFCCA violated the Appointments Clause?
- Case path
United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces / Decision released Jun 22, 2018
- Area
Decided Supreme Court case
Briefing
What it's about
This case asked whether the Supreme Court could review these military appeals and whether Judge Martin T. Mitchell could legally serve on the U.S. Court of Military Commission Review and the U.S. Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals at the same time. The Court issued a decision on June 22, 2018, after hearing argument on January 16, 2018.
Vote
The Court heard argument on January 16, 2018, and issued its decision on June 22, 2018, but the prompt does not provide the vote or opinion lineup.
Impact
The dispute could affect service members whose cases were heard by judges serving in more than one military judicial role. For example, a person challenging a military conviction could argue that a judge's dual service made the appeal process unlawful.
What's next
The Supreme Court has finished this case. The parties and the military courts must proceed under the Court's June 22, 2018 decision.
What was the main fight in Dalmazzi v. United States?
The petitioners challenged Judge Mitchell's service on two military courts at the same time. They also disputed Supreme Court jurisdiction and whether some claims were moot.
Who could feel the effects of this case in real life?
Service members appealing military convictions could be affected most. The case also matters for military judges and officials who assign judges to different courts.
What was the next procedural step after the Supreme Court acted?
There was no further Supreme Court step listed here because the case was decided. The military courts and the parties would then follow the Court's decision.
Decision
What the Court decided
The case centered on Supreme Court review of military appeals and on whether one military judge could serve on two courts at once.
Impact
The dispute could affect service members whose cases were heard by judges serving in more than one military judicial role. For example, a person challenging a military conviction could argue that a judge's dual service made the appeal process unlawful.
Not official Court text.
Opinion documents
Related cases
Grounding
- Grounding
- Primary materials plus reporting.
- Note
- Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.
- Checked
- Jul 2, 2026
- Method
- Methodology