Legal Opinion

United States v. Hopewell

U S Air Force Court of Military Review

Decided February 6, 1978No. ACM S24556PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DECISION

ARROWOOD, Judge:

Appellate defense counsel invite our attention to several errors assigned by the accused’s counsel in his response to the post-trial review. With the exception of the following issue, we perceive no merit in the assigned errors.

It is contended that the military judge erred to the substantial prejudice of the accused by failing to instruct the court that Airman Smith was an accomplice in the offense of selling amphetamine. The government’s entire case was based on the *807testimony of Airman Smith and Airman Long. The accused’s defense was based on the lack of credibility…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. United States v. MooreU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1977
  2. United States v. PopeU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1977
  3. United States v. McCueU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1977
  4. United States v. WilliamsonU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1976

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. United States v. HarrisonU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1978
  2. United States v. SandersU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1992

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

Powered by the Exa API