Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

United States v. Cockrell

U S Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals

Decided June 18, 2004No. CGCMG 0190; Docket No. 1199Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Judge CAHILL

concurs in part and dissents in part:

I join in the decision with respect to the assignment of error involving service of charges. I also concur that the military judge erred by failing to explain each element of the pretrial agreement, but apply a different analysis from that of Chief Judge Baum in concluding that such error was harmless. I disagree with the determination that Appellant’s plea of guilty to watching child pornography was provident, and I would disapprove that finding on that basis. I also believe that a lesser sentence would not have been adjudged at trial if…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. United States v. PerronCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2003
  2. United States v. FelderCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2004
  3. United States v. PerronU S Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals · 2001

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

Powered by the Exa API