United States v. O'Donnell
U S Air Force Court of Military Review
1Dissent
Senior Judge SESSOMS
dissenting:
Unlike the majority, I do not find the challenged instruction to be materially prejudicial to the substantial rights of the appellant, and I would affirm.
Since the accused judicially confessed to the offenses of which he was convicted, and the evidence adduced could reasonably lead a fact finder to determine that he was not entrapped, the only question for this court to resolve is whether the issue of entrapment was fairly presented to the members for their consideration. I believe that it was.
The military judge delivered the standard instruction on entrapment…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- United States v. VanzandtUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1982
- United States v. HebertUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1975
- United States v. Eddie Everett Gonzales, United States of America v. Cecil Charles Stine and Edward KilpatrickCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1976
- United States v. BeltranU.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review · 1983