�鶹Ƶ��

The United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals will be sitting at the on Tuesday, Nov. 7, in the Melanie Gray Ceremonial Courtroom in Dineen Hall.

The hearing will begin at noon for the case of U.S. v. U.S. Army Staff Sergeant (E-6) Daniel D. Herman. The case concerns an Army soldier who was convicted of wrongfully broadcasting intimate visual images and making a false official statement. Representing the appellant will be Major Mitchell Herniak and Jonathan Potter. Representing the government will be Captain Stu Miller and Major Chase Cleveland. The court commissioners are Captain Andrew O’Grady and Captain Alex Vanscoy.

The three-judge panel will consist of Appellate Military Senior Judge Colonel Elizabeth Walker, Associate Judge Colonel Tim Hayes and Associate Judge Colonel LaJohnne Morris. The oral arguments are open to all.

Herman was tried at Fort Hood, Texas, before a general court martial appointed by Commander, III Corps and Fort Hood, Lieutenant Colonel Scott Z. Hughes, presiding. On May 14, 2022, a military judge sitting as a general court-martial convicted Herman (the appellant), contrary to his pleas, of six specifications of wrongful broadcast of intimate visual images and one specification of false official statement in violation of Articles 117a and 107, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. §§ 917a and 907 [UCMJ]. The military judge sentenced Herman to reduction to the grade of E-1, confinement for 13 months and a bad conduct discharge. On May 23, 2022, the convening authority approved the findings and sentence as adjudged. On June 13, 2022, the military judge entered judgment.

Arguments will be heard on the following issue: “Whether the military judge erred by denying appellant’s motion to suppress statements and derivative evidence.”

Professor who arranged the court’s visit says, “this hearing should appeal to a number of students at �鶹Ƶ��Law. The proceedings may be rooted in military law, but the matters the court will discuss include issues pertinent to all law school students—constitutional rights, the privilege against self-incrimination, custodial interrogation and even policy considerations.”

More information about the case can be found on the . Following the hearing, there will be a Q&A session with the judges, as well as a reception with judges and representatives of the Judge Advocate General’s Corps from Fort Drum in the Levy Atrium.