Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

United States v. Bivins

United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals

Decided December 16, 1996No. ACM 32044Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partDixon, Chief Judge

Relying upon this Court’s decision in United States v. Hode, 44 M.J. 816 (A.F.Ct.Crim. App.1996), the majority modifies appellant’s conviction of violating a lawful general regulation, AFI 34-119, by only affirming his conviction of the lesser included offense of dereliction of duty by consuming alcoholic beverages while under the age of 21. Although the majority follows the precedent of this Court, I cannot concur that by so doing we reach the correct result. Consistent with his plea to violating a lawful general regulation by underage drinking, I would affirm his conviction. Moreover, I…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. United States v. FosterUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1994
  2. United States v. NardellUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1972
  3. United States v. HodeUnited States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals · 1996
  4. United States v. BoyettU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1993

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

Powered by the Exa API