United States v. Donohue
U S Air Force Court of Military Review
1Opinion of the Court
DECISION
KASTL, Senior Judge:
During presentencing proceedings, it is clear that the prosecution may now offer relevant material from the commander’s or supervisor’s Personnel Information File (PIF). See Air Force Regulation 111-1, Military Justice Guide, paragraph IS — 4b(1) (30 September 1988). The regulation provides that relevant material is admissible if:(b) There is some evidence on the document or attached thereto that:
1. The accused received a copy of the correspondence ...; and
2. The accused had the opportunity to respond to the allegation.
(Emphasis added).
The issue before us is this:…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- United States v. SalesUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1986
- United States v. BolesUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1981
- United States v. FontenotUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1989
- United States v. KingU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1989
- United States v. SmithU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1989
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- United States v. DudleyU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1992
- United States v. LorencU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1991