Legal Opinion
United States v. Hagen
U.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review
Decided April 28, 1980No. NCM 79 0797PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
GLADIS, Judge:
On appeal the accused contends, among other things, that the staff judge advocate’s review was inadequate because it failed to discuss the speedy trial issue litigated at trial. We agree and return the record for another review and supervisory authority’s action.
Relying on Chief Judge Fletcher’s opinion, concurring in the result, in United States v. Morrison, 3 M.J. 408 (C.M.A.1977), the staff judge advocate refused to discuss the speedy trial issue. He interpreted that opinion together with Judge Perry’s concurrence in that case to promulgate new standards for the post-trial…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- United States v. GoodeUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1975
- United States v. CruseUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1972
- United States v. MorrisonUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1977
- United States v. CansdaleUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1979
- United States v. AmbroseU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1979
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- United States v. RojasU.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review · 1983
- United States v. BresemanU S Coast Guard Court of Military Review · 1986
- United States v. PriceU.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review · 1982
- United States v. BeckwithU.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review · 1982
- United States v. McKinleyU.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review · 1982