United States v. Holmes
United States Court of Military Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion of the Court
Robert E. Quinn, Chief Judge:
Pursuant to the provisions of Article 67 (&) (2) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, 50 USC § 654, The Judge Advocate General of the United States Air Force has filed a certificate seeking review of certain questions of law in this case,
Airman Holmes, the accused, needed 'gasoline for his car. He decided to obtain it by “moonlight requisition.” First, he got a twenty-five gallon drum, and then he proceeded to a parking lot at the Briggs Air Force Base. There, he went directly to a water sprinkler truck, He removed the cap and strainer *154from…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- United States v. TaylorUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1954
- United States v. SoukupUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1953
- United States v. VillasenorUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1955
- United States v. RosatoUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1953
- United States v. BallUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1955
3Cited by24 opinions
- United States v. NowlingUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1958
- United States v. InsaniUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1959
- United States v. HarmanUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1961
- United States v. DialUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1958
- United States v. MusguireUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1958
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.