United States v. Crooks
U.S. Army Court of Military Review
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
COSTELLO, Judge:
Appellant was convicted by a military jury of aggravated assault in violation of Article 128, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), 10 U.S.C. § 928. His initial assertion of error did not state a basis for granting relief, but supplementary pleadings have raised issues warranting discussion.
Appellate defense counsel moved for leave to file three affidavits with a Supplemental Assignment of Error alleging that “The appellant was inadequately represented at his court-martial.” In those affidavits, appellant charged his trial defense counsel with failure to…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Anders v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- United States v. FlintUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1976
- United States v. LarneardUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1977
- In the Matter of the Application for a Writ of Habeas Corpus for Larry C. High v. B. J. Rhay, Superintendent, Washington State PenitentiaryCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1975
- United States v. HerndonU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1976
3Cited by1 opinion
- United States v. AubinU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1982