United States v. Barfield
United States Court of Military Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion of the Court
COOK, Judge:
On a previous appeal, this Court authorized a rehearing for sentencing because of prejudicial error in the denial of a defense request for a continuance to obtain an *137Army psychiatrist, Dr. Gould, as a witness. 22 U.S.C.M.A. 321, 46 C.M.R. 321 (1973). The question here is the correctness of the trial judge’s denial, at the rehearing, of a defense motion, under paragraph 81b (2), Manual for Courts-Martial, United States, 1969 (Rev.), to suspend the proceeding and refer to this Court the accused’s contention that his plea of guilty at the original trial was…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- United States v. CareUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1969
- United States v. ChancelorUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1966
- United States v. KepperlingUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1960
- United States v. YaegerUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1965
3Cited by7 opinions
- United States v. MontesinosUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1989
- United States v. MontesinosU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1987
- United States v. ZieranU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1982
- United States v. FergusonU.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review · 1988
- United States v. CourtsU S Coast Guard Court of Military Review · 1977
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.