Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

United States v. Honeycutt

U.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review

Decided December 21, 1978No. NCM 78 1180Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partBaum, Senior Judge

I concur with all in the majority opinion save that portion dealing with admission in evidence of Prosecution Exhibit 1, a document reflecting preservice use of marijuana and a categorical rejection of future drug abuse. Although United States v. Martin, 5 M.J. 888 (N.C.M.R.1978) and United States v. Galloway, No. 76 1677 (N.C.M.R. 14 September 1976) both contemplate instances when the conditions of enlistment or preservice conduct would be admissible in evidence, such as proper matter in rebuttal or as evidence bearing on the validity of an enlistment for jurisdictional purposes, such…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. United States v. RileyU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1978

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API