Legal Opinion

United States v. Witherspoon

U.S. Army Court of Military Review

Decided February 28, 1985No. CM 444824PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

NAUGHTON, Judge:

Appellant contends that he was prejudiced by the sentence limitation terms of the pretrial agreement which were operative only if a punitive discharge was adjudged. In light of United States v. Castleberry, 18 M.J. 826 (ACMR 1984), and United States v. Holmes, 17 M.J. 830 (ACMR), pet. denied, 18 M.J. 438 (CMA 1984), we find this contention to be without merit. Such provisions are not violative of public policy.

The findings of guilty and the sentence are affirmed.

COHEN, J., concurs.1

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. United States v. HolmesU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1984
  2. United States v. CastleberryU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1984

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. United States v. SandersU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1985