United States v. Pettaway
U.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review
1Per curiam
We have examined the record of trial and heard oral argument on the assignments of error, and the Government’s reply thereto and have concluded that the findings and sentence are correct in law and fact and that no error materially prejudicial to the substantial rights of the appellant was committed.
At a general court-martial with members, appellant was tried and convicted, contrary to his pleas, of two specifications of possession and five specifications of distribution of marijuana; two specifications of carnal knowledge; two specifications of sodomy, and four specifications of distributing…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Henderson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- United States v. FrederickUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1977
- United States v. WattenbargerUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1985
- United States v. Larry Fate Fortune and Wayne William BarfieldCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1975
- United States v. CareyUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1960
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- United States v. SimsU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1991
- United States v. MayfieldNavy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals · 1995
- United States v. SmithNavy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals · 1995
- United States v. TurnerNavy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals · 1996