United States v. Fortier
United States Court of Military Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion of the Court
Ferguson, Judge:
Since the record in this case fails to reflect compliance with this Court’s directive in United States v Donohew, 18 USCMA 149, 39 CMR 149, reversal is required.
At the outset of this special court-martial, the following colloquy appears :
“PRES: Does the accused understand that she has a right to have civilian counsol if provided by her?
“DC: Yes, sir.
“PRES: Is the accused satisfied to proceed with the defense counsel presently repi-esenting her?
“ACCUSED: Yes, sir.”
In essence, this is the same type of inquiry which he held in Donohew to minimally comply with…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- United States v. DonohewUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1969
3Cited by27 opinions
- United States v. BowmanUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1970
- United States v. CopesUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1975
- United States v. JerasiU.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review · 1985
- United States v. CarterUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1970
- United States v. ScottUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1970
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.