United States v. Martinez

OPINION OF THE COURT

CARMICHAEL, Judge:

The appellant was arraigned at an Article 39(a) session1 where his trial forum options were fully explained by the military *732judge.2 The appellant deferred deciding on a trial forum since his civilian counsel was not present. He also declined to plead. The arraignment was completed and the session was adjourned.

More than a month later, at the next court session, a different military judge presided. Without inquiring about the appellant’s election regarding the court-martial’s composition, the second judge received the appellant’s pleas of guilty,3 found…