Dalmazzi v. United States

Dalmazzi v. United States, consolidated with Ortiz v. United States, was decided by the U.S. Supreme Court on June 22, 2018. The petitioners were service members convicted by court-martial who appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF). They argued that one of the appellate judges, Judge Mitchell, was simultaneously serving as a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, violating the Constitution’s Appointments Clause and the prohibition on dual officeholding. In the consolidated ruling, the Supreme Court first established its jurisdiction to review CAAF decisions. For Dalmazzi, the Court found that Judge Mitchell’s dual service raised serious constitutional questions. It vacated the CAAF’s judgment and remanded the case for further proceedings to determine whether the decision could stand without his participation.

The Supreme Court affirmed its appellate jurisdiction over the CAAF in the companion case Ortiz v. United States. In Dalmazzi, the Court vacated the CAAF’s ruling and remanded the case, instructing the lower court to reconsider the matter without the participation of the dual-serving judge.

Whether a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces may simultaneously serve as an active judge on another federal court without violating the Appointments Clause and the constitutional bar on holding dual offices.

The decision reinforced the Supreme Court’s oversight of the military justice system and clarified the constitutional limits on military appellate judges holding multiple federal judicial offices, emphasizing the need to avoid potential impartiality concerns in courts-martial appeals.