Legal Opinion · Concurrence

United States v. Polomski

U.S. Army Court of Military Review

Decided June 25, 1984No. CM 443994Published

1Concurrence

WATKINS, Judge, with whom Senior Judge McKAY and Judge WERNER

join, concurring in the result:

I agree in principle with the majority holding that, in a judge-alone, guilty-plea general court-martial case it is error for the military judge to impose a fine in addition to forfeiture of all pay and allowances where he has failed during the providence inquiry to advise the accused that a fine constitutes an authorized element of punishment. I would make clear, however, that an error of this nature must be tested for prejudice and that the remedy of sentence modification is neither required nor…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. United States v. WallsUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1980
  2. United States v. PassiniUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1980
  3. United States v. HintonUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1981
  4. United States v. GriegoUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1981
  5. United States v. ShirleyUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1983

1 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