United States v. Hamdan
| Decision Date | 24 June 2011 |
| Docket Number | CMCR 09–002. |
| Parties | UNITED STATES of America v. Salim Ahmed HAMDAN. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Hawaii |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Joseph M. McMillan argued the cause for appellant. With him on the briefs were Harry H. Schneider, Jr., Charles C. Sipos, Adam Thurschwell, and Captain Michael G. Thieme, U.S. Air Force.
Francis A. Gilligan argued the cause for appellee. With him on the briefs were Captain John F. Murphy, JAGC, U.S. Navy and Captain Edward S. White, JAGC, U.S. Navy.
Briefs of amici curiae urging reversal were filed for the National Institute of Military Justice by Marc A. Goldman and Michelle M. Lindo McCluer; for Professor Dr. Terry D. Gill and Dr. Gentian Zyberi by Michael R. Doyen, Gregory D. Phillips, and David C. Lachman; for Constitutional Law Scholars by Kimball R. Anderson and John A. Sholar, Jr., with the assistance of Law Student Contributors: Kenneth Burden, Andrew Linenberg, Amy Pahlka–Sellars, and Neha Sinha (Rutgers University School of Law—Camden); for Professors Geoffrey S. Corn and Victor M. Hansen by Sylvia H. Walbolt. Brief of amici curiae urging recusal of two judges was filed for the National Institute of Military Justice by Eugene R. Fidell, Michelle M. Lindo McCluer, and Jonathan E. Tracy.BEFORE THE COURT EN BANC BRAND, CONN, HOFFMAN, SIMS, GALLAGHER, PERLAK, ORR, 1 Appellate Military Judges.
PUBLISHED OPINION OF THE COURT
Appellant was convicted, contrary to his pleas, of five specifications of providing material support for terrorism, in violation of the Military Commissions Act of 2006, 10 U.S.C. § 950v(b)(25), at a military commission convened at U.S. Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The military commission sentenced him to 66 months confinement, and the convening authority approved the findings and sentence. Under our review authority,2 we have carefully considered the record and the various pleadings, briefs, and oral arguments of the parties and amici. We find appellant's assignments of error and pleadings, to include his filing on granted issues,3 to be without merit, and we affirm the findings and sentence.
The record establishes and the military commission found that appellant joined and became a member of al Qaeda, a well-established terrorist organization, with the knowledge that al Qaeda has engaged in and engages in terrorism. He had the intent to join in al Qaeda's purposes, and he subsequently took actions to further al Qaeda's goals and purposes.4
As early as 1989, Usama bin Laden associated with al Qaeda's Shura Counsel, especially the leader of the Egyptian Islamic Jihad Movement, Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri, and Omar Abdel Rahman, the Blind Shaykh. Rahman was “the joint spiritual leader of the two leading terrorist organizations in Egypt, the Islamic Jihad and Al–Gama'at al-Islamiyya.” 5 Al Qaeda, a military organization, has been involved in various violent activities directed against U.S. civilian and military personnel since at least 1991. “In December 1991, Islamic militants launched a failed bomb attack at a hotel in Aden, Yemen targeting 100 U.S. soldiers who were staying there en route to peacekeeping duties in nearby Somalia.” The 1991 Aden bombing, which killed two tourists, was “in response to a ‘fatwah,’ or religious edict, issued on behalf of [al-Qaeda] in late 1991—which condemned the presence of U.S. military peacekeepers as an attempt to colonize the Muslim world.”
In late 1992, bin Laden led meetings of terrorists at al Qaeda guesthouses in Khartoum, Sudan. Al Banshiri, al Qaeda's chief military commander, told al Qaeda members that al Qaeda hoped the United States would become involved in the civil war in Somalia so “that we make a big war with them.” Bin Laden announced to 30–40 al Qaeda members in late 1993 that In 1993, al Qaeda's leaders sent al Qaeda Shura Council member Mohammed Atef (a.k.a. Abu Hafs al Masri) to Somalia to organize and train for an attack upon U.S. forces. In October 1993, Somali militiamen used rocket-propelled grenades to shoot down two U.S. Blackhawk helicopters over Mogadishu. Eighteen U.S. military personnel and numerous militiamen were killed in the ensuing street battle. Shortly thereafter, Abu Hafs spoke with al Qaeda members in the Sudan and stated, “everything happening in Somalia, it's our responsibility ... the al Qaeda group, our group.”
In January 1996, Rahman was convicted in U.S. federal court of conspiracy for inspiring the February 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center. United States v. Rahman, 189 F.3d 88, 103 (2d Cir.1999). In early 1996, Mohammed bin Attash, a close associate of bin Laden, convinced appellant that he should go from his home in Yemen to Tajikistan for Jihad. Bin Attash gave appellant a false passport and an airline ticket to fly from Yemen to Pakistan. Appellant stayed in guest houses in Pakistan, and then he went to Afghanistan. Once in Afghanistan, appellant spent 30–40 days at Al Farouq, an al Qaeda training camp. While there, appellant received training on a variety of weapons, including AK–47s, machine guns,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hamdan v. United States
...for terrorism as a war crime. In 2011, the Court of Military Commission Review affirmed the conviction. See United States v. Hamdan, 801 F.Supp.2d 1247 (C.M.C.R.2011) (en banc). By statute, Hamdan has an automatic right of appeal to this Court. See10 U.S.C. § 950g.II We must first address t......
-
United States v. Al Bahlul
...We recently decided the first direct appeal of a conviction by military commission convened under the 2006 M.C.A. United States v. Hamdan, 801 F.Supp.2d 1247, 2011 WL 2923945 (USCMCR June 24, 2011). In Hamdan , we concluded that the charged conduct of providing military support for terrori......
-
Knight v. Pugh
... ... Ronald Charles PUGH, et al., Defendants. Case No. 1:09cv1148MEF. United States District Court, M.D. Alabama, Southern Division. Aug. 10, 2011 ... [801 F.Supp.2d ... ...
-
Lep v. Trump
...the application of equal protection principles in this law-of-war context to foreign enemy combatants."); see also United States v. Hamdan, 801 F. Supp. 2d 1247, 1318 (USCMCR 2011) (finding "no precedent comprehensively extending equal protection . . . rights to noncitizens tried by militar......