Legal Opinion · Concurrence

United States v. Peterson

U.S. Army Court of Military Review

Decided November 28, 1986No. SPCM 22060Published

1ConcurrenceKennett, Judge

I concur in the result reached by the Senior Judge and agree that United States v. Bradley, 7 M.J. 332 (C.M.A.1979), is the controlling precedent. Bradley sets forth a very simple procedure for military judges, to wit: if the accused’s pleas are changed from guilty to not guilty after the judge enters findings of guilty, the judge must either recuse himself or direct a trial with members. Bradley, 7 M.J. at 334. See United States v. Cooper, 8 M.J. 5, 7 (C.M.A.1979). This procedure needs neither objective nor subjective analysis: it is a mandatory decision dictated by the timing of the change…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. United States v. BradleyUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1979
  2. United States v. CooperUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1979
  3. United States v. FlynnU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1981

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

Powered by the Exa API