United States v. Malczewskyj
U S Air Force Court of Military Review
1Opinion of the Court
DECISION
BLOMMERS, Judge:
The appellant’s court-martial was convened by a special order detailing nine members thereto.1 A subsequent amending order relieved five of these members and detailed four new members, leaving eight members on the panel. See generally R.C.M. 505. From the record, it appears that the “wrong panel” (we presume this to be the members detailed by the original convening order) was notified of the trial date. On the morning the court was ready to assemble with the members, efforts were made to contact the “right panel” members, but only three were available. A general…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- United States v. ManceUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1988
- Ellis v. JacobUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1988
- United States v. JetteUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1987
- United States v. AllenUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1955
- United States v. BrittonUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1988
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- United States v. LatimerU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1990
- United States v. PonderU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1989
- United States v. AlexanderU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1989
- United States v. BouknightU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1992