Legal Opinion
United States v. Suzuki
United States Court of Military Appeals
Decided January 31, 1983No. 41691; ACM 23133PublishedCited by 91 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion of the Court
FLETCHER, Judge:
We are called upon in this case1 to consider whether this military judge had authority to order more than a day-for-day credit for illegal pretrial confinement. Cf. United States v. Occhi, 2 M.J. 60 (C.M.A. 1976). After careful consideration, we answer this question in the affirmative, inas*492much as United States v. Larner, 1 M.J. 371 (C.M.A.1976), is not an absolute remedial rule and the remedy there corresponded to the facts of that case. Moreover, we conclude that a convening authority cannot unilaterally ignore a military judge’s ruling, even when…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Dettinger v. United StatesUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1979
- United States v. LarnerUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1976
- United States v. WareUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1976
- United States v. NelsonUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1969
- United States v. ReddingUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1981
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by91 opinions
- United States v. SuzukiUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1985
- United States v. CruzUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1987
- United States v. InongCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2003
- United States v. MooreUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1991
- United States v. SpaustatCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2002
86 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.