United States v. Hall
U.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review
1Opinion of the Court
REED, Judge.
We have examined the record of trial, the assignments of error1, and the Government’s reply thereto. The findings are affirmed. However, the sentence requires reassessment because of error committed. Our discussion follows.
On 17 June 1991, appellant was tried by general court-martial, military judge alone. Pursuant to his pleas, appellant was convicted of violating a lawful general regulation by removing classified material from a designated office; assaulting a child under the age of 16 by unlawfully burning the child on the left arm and left thigh with a *772cigarette lighter; and…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- United States v. PierceUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1989
- United States v. LarnerUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1976
3Cited by2 opinions
- United States v. DireU S Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals · 1997
- United States v. DireU S Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals · 1997