United States v. Gacioch
U.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review
1Opinion of the Court
ORR, Judge:
We have examined the record of trial, the assignment of error,1 and the Government’s response, and we have concluded that the findings and the sentence are correct in law and fact and that no error materially prejudicial to the substantial rights of the appellant was committed. The appellant pled guilty to an unauthorized absence, several disrespect offenses, and two disobedience of orders offenses pursuant to a pretrial agreement that contained an automatic deferment clause similar to the one suggested in United States v. Carter, 32 M.J. 830, 831 (N.M.C.M.R.1991) (per curiam), and…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- United States v. CarterU.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review · 1991
- United States v. ShropshireU.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review · 1989
3Cited by1 opinion
- United States v. BrandonU.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review · 1991