U.S. Code » Title 10 » Subtitle Subtitle A— General Military Law › Part PART II— PERSONNEL › Chapter CHAPTER 47A— MILITARY COMMISSIONS › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER VII— POST-TRIAL PROCEDURE AND REVIEW OF MILITARY COMMISSIONS

10 U.S.C. § 950c

Appellate referral; waiver or withdrawal of appeal

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 10 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a)Automatic Referral for Appellate Review.—Except as provided in subsection (b), in each case in which the final decision of a military commission under this chapter (as approved by the convening authority) includes a finding of guilty, the convening authority shall refer the case to the United States Court of Military Commission Review. Any such referral shall be made in accordance with procedures prescribed under regulations of the Secretary.(b)Waiver of Right of Review.—(1) Except in a case in which the sentence as approved under section 950b of this title extends to death, an accused may file with the convening authority a statement expressly waiving the right of the accused to appellate review by the United States Court of Military Commission Review under section 950f of this title of the final decision of the military commission under this chapter.(2) A waiver under paragraph (1) shall be signed by both the accused and a defense counsel.(3) A waiver under paragraph (1) must be filed, if at all, within 10 days after notice of the action is served on the accused or on defense counsel under section 950b(c)(4) of this title. The convening authority, for good cause, may extend the period for such filing by not more than 30 days.(c)Withdrawal of Appeal.—Except in a case in which the sentence as approved under section 950b of this title extends to death, the accused may withdraw an appeal at any time.(d)Effect of Waiver or Withdrawal.—A waiver of the right to appellate review or the withdrawal of an appeal under this section bars review under section 950f of this title.(Added Pub. L. 111–84, div. A, title XVIII, § 1802, Oct. 28, 2009, 123 Stat. 2600.)Editorial NotesPrior Provisions

A prior section 950c, added Pub. L. 109–366, § 3(a)(1), Oct. 17, 2006, 120 Stat. 2620, related to appellate referral and waiver or withdrawal of appeal, prior to the general amendment of this chapter by Pub. L. 111–84.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 2007–2024 · leading case: Omar Khadr v. United States, 67 F.4th 413 (D.C. Cir. 2023).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Omar Khadr v. United States, 67 F.4th 413 (D.C. Cir. 2023). · cites it 6× “Khadr has been released without conditions. Although the convening authority approved the commission’s finding of guilty, he did not refer Khadr’s case to the CMCR for review pursuant to 10 U.”
Ali Hamza Ahmad al Bahlul v. United States, 77 F.4th 918 (D.C. Cir. 2023). “At Bahlul’s request, Crawford referred his case for review by the CMCR, pursuant to 10 U.S.C. § 950c(a). The CMCR affirmed his convictions and sentence in full.”
United States v. Al Qosi, 28 F. Supp. 3d 1198 (M.C. 2014). · cites it 2× “See 10 U.S.C. § 950c(a). This argument does not address what effect, if any, an effort by Al Qosi to appeal or collaterally attack his conviction might have on his pretrial agreement.”
Hicks v. United States, 94 F. Supp. 3d 1241 (M.C. 2015). · cites it 3× “The Military Commissions Act of 2009 retained 10 U.S.C. § 950c without change in 10 U.S.”
United States v. Khadr, 717 F. Supp. 2d 1203 (M.C. 2007). · cites it 2× “Appellee does not suggest, nor would it be reasonable to do so, that an accused convicted and sentenced by a Military Commission could be deprived of the statutory right of appeal guaranteed him by 10 U.S.C. § 950c because of delays or perceived errors in the establishment of…”
Ali Hamza Ahmad al Bahlul v. United States (D.C. Cir. 2023). “At Bahlul’s request, Crawford referred his case for review by the CMCR, pursuant to 10 U.S.C. § 950c(a). The CMCR affirmed his convictions and sentence in full.”
In re: Encep Nurjaman (D.C. Cir. 2024). “See 10 U.S.C. § 950c(a); see also id. § 950c(b) (enabling the accused to waive right of review in certain cases).”
In re Al Qosi, 602 F. App'x 542 (D.C. Cir. 2015). “Instead, she asserts that al Qosi’s conviction is properly before this court due to the confluence of her appointment by the Chief Defense Counsel, al Qosi’s automatic appeal to the Review Court (given the alleged ineffectiveness of his waiver), see 10 U.S.C. § 950c(a)-(b), and…”
— 10 U.S.C. § 950c(a) — 7 cases
Ali Hamza Ahmad al Bahlul v. United States, 77 F.4th 918 (D.C. Cir. 2023). “At Bahlul’s request, Crawford referred his case for review by the CMCR, pursuant to 10 U.S.C. § 950c(a). The CMCR affirmed his convictions and sentence in full.”
Omar Khadr v. United States, 67 F.4th 413 (D.C. Cir. 2023). “Khadr has been released without conditions. Although the convening authority approved the commission’s finding of guilty, he did not refer Khadr’s case to the CMCR for review pursuant to 10 U.”
United States v. Al Qosi, 28 F. Supp. 3d 1198 (M.C. 2014). “See 10 U.S.C. § 950c(a). This argument does not address what effect, if any, an effort by Al Qosi to appeal or collaterally attack his conviction might have on his pretrial agreement.”
Hicks v. United States, 94 F. Supp. 3d 1241 (M.C. 2015). “The Military Commissions Act of 2009 retained 10 U.S.C. § 950c without change in 10 U.S.”
Ali Hamza Ahmad al Bahlul v. United States (D.C. Cir. 2023). “At Bahlul’s request, Crawford referred his case for review by the CMCR, pursuant to 10 U.S.C. § 950c(a). The CMCR affirmed his convictions and sentence in full.”
— 10 U.S.C. § 950c(b) — 1 case
Omar Khadr v. United States, 67 F.4th 413 (D.C. Cir. 2023). “Khadr has been released without conditions. Although the convening authority approved the commission’s finding of guilty, he did not refer Khadr’s case to the CMCR for review pursuant to 10 U.”
— 10 U.S.C. § 950c(b)(3) — 2 cases
Omar Khadr v. United States, 67 F.4th 413 (D.C. Cir. 2023). “Khadr has been released without conditions. Although the convening authority approved the commission’s finding of guilty, he did not refer Khadr’s case to the CMCR for review pursuant to 10 U.”
United States v. Al Qosi, 28 F. Supp. 3d 1198 (M.C. 2014). “See 10 U.S.C. § 950c(a). This argument does not address what effect, if any, an effort by Al Qosi to appeal or collaterally attack his conviction might have on his pretrial agreement.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.