United States v. Perkinson
United States Court of Military Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
FLETCHER, Judge:
This case * was granted review to consider two questions:
I
WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE ERRED TO THE SUBSTANTIAL PREJUDICE OF APPELLANT BY FAILING TO (A) SET FORTH THE PROPER PROCEDURES TO BE UTILIZED IN RECONSIDERATION AND (B) DETAIL AND TAILOR HIS INSTRUCTIONS AS TO POSSIBLE CLEMENCY RECOMMENDATIONS TO *401THE SITUATION WHICH HAD DEVELOPED?
II
WHETHER THE COURT-MARTIAL LACKED JURISDICTION TO PROCEED WHEN THE PURPORTED ORAL MODIFICATION TO THE CONVENING ORDER ON 3 MARCH 1981, APPARENTLY DETAILING THE MEMBERS WHO SENTENCED APPELLANT, WAS NOT REDUCED TO WRITING AND MADE PART OF…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- United States v. TurnerUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1964
- United StateS v. WareUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1978
- United States v. JusticeUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1977
3Cited by16 opinions
- United States v. CaputoUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1984
- United States v. KingUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1989
- United States v. AlexanderCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2005
- United States v. GarnerCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2013
- United States v. WheatcraftU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1986
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.