Legal Opinion · Concurrence

United States v. Jones

United States Court of Military Appeals

Decided May 25, 1956No. 7794Published

1ConcurrenceLatimer, Judge

(concurring in the result) :

I concur ins the result.

I find it necessary to .pen a separate *86opinion in the case for two reasons: First, because the majority opinion fails to respond to the first certified issue, and second, while phrased in an ambiguous manner, the question can be interpreted to request our opinion on the effect of a mistake of fact in cases involving either a specific or general criminal intent. I reach that conclusion because the specification originally alleged willful disobedience, but now, because of the action of the convening authority, presents the included offense of…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. United States v. KunakUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1954
  2. United States v. RowanUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1954
  3. United States v. McCluskeyUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1955
  4. United States v. GreenwoodUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1955
  5. United States v. PinkstonUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1956

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API