Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

United States v. Beasley

United States Court of Military Appeals

Decided November 6, 1970No. 23,029Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partFerguson, Judge

I concur in part and dissent in part.

I disagree with my brothers’ holding in this case that the plea of guilty was properly accepted by the military judge for the reasons set forth in my separate opinion in United States v Palos, 20 USCMA 104, 42 CMR 296 (1970). The military judge’s failure to make a specific finding on the record that the accused knowingly, intelligently, and consciously waived his right against self-incrimination, his right to trial of the facts by a court-martial, and his right to be confronted by the witnesses against him, is, in my opinion, reversible error. Cf. United…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. United States v. DonohewUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1969
  2. United States v. JohnsonUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1970
  3. United States v. PalosUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1970
  4. United States v. FortierUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1969
  5. United States v. WorrellUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1970

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

Powered by the Exa API