United States v. Valles-Santana
U.S. Army Court of Military Review
1ConcurrenceCook, Senior Judge
I concur in the result. Like the majority, I find sufficient “service connection,” as that term is defined in O’Callahan v. Parker, 395 U.S. 258, 89 S.Ct. 1683, 23 L.Ed.2d 291 (1969) and Relford v. Commandant, 401 U.S. 355, 91 S.Ct. 649, 28 L.Ed.2d 102 (1971), only as to appellant’s criminal acts on 21 November 1974.
My reluctance to concur outright is hinged on the principal opinion’s treatment of United States v. Blancuzzi, 46 C.M.R. 922 (N.C.M.R.1972). As I read that opinion the Navy Court of Review refused to apply in the case of an off-post drug sale to an undercover military police…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- O'Callahan v. ParkerSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Relford v. Commandant, US Disciplinary Barracks, Fort LeavenworthSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- United States v. McCarthyUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1976
- United States v. RoseUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1969
- United States v. EdmundsonU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1976
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.