United States v. Devins
U.S. Army Court of Military Review
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partCook, Judge
Following the ratio decidendi of United States v. Bryant, 3 M.J. 396 (C.M.A.1977), I concur with my brethren in their disposition of appellant’s assertion that the rule established in Dunlap v. Convening Authority, 23 U.S.C.M.A. 135, 48 C.M.R. 751 (1974), is for application in his case.
I am unable, however, to join my compatriots in their resolution of the violation of the mandate created in United States v. Goode, 23 U.S.C.M.A. 367, 50 C.M.R. 1, 1 M.J. 3 (1975). While they concede that the staff judge advocate erred in not providing the trial defense counsel with a copy of his review until…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- United States v. GoodeUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1975
- United States v. HillUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1977
- United States v. KellerUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1975
- United States v. BryantUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1977
- United States v. BrownU.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review · 1976