United States v. Bierley
U S Air Force Court of Military Review
1Opinion of the Court
DECISION
FORAY, Senior Judge:
Appellant is contesting his special court-martial conviction for drug abuse by contending:
I
THE COURT-MARTIAL WAS WITHOUT JURISDICTION BECAUSE LT COL [H], THE CONVENING AUTHORITY, WAS NOT PROPERLY APPOINTED TO COMMAND.
But, if he was properly appointed to command, then:
II
THE ACTION OF THE CONVENING AUTHORITY IS INVALID, AS THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT COLONEL [W] WAS PROPERLY IN COMMAND.
At the trial of this case, during arraignment, trial counsel announced that the charges were, in fact, referred to trial by Lieutenant Colonel H.1 A copy of a special order announcing…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- United States v. BuntingUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1954
- United States v. KugimaUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1966
- United States v. O'ConnorU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1984
- United States v. JetteU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1985
- United States v. PazdernikU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1986
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- United States v. MinerU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1986
- United States v. MinerU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1986