Legal Opinion

United States v. Hillman

U.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review

Decided June 22, 1984No. NMCM 84 0075PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CASSEL, Judge:

Before this Court appellant has assigned eight errors. They involve such matters as appropriateness of the sentence, admissibility of a urinalysis sample not taken strictly in conformance with regulation, reasonable doubt as to guilt because of the irregularities in the collection procedure, a refusal to admit exculpatory polygraph results, erroneous staff judge advocate’s advice, and the use of an erroneous standard by the convening authority in approving the findings of the military judge, as well as other equally interesting issues. Our decision in this case does not require…

2Cited by6 opinions

  1. Egloff v. New Jersey Air National GuardDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1988
  2. United States v. ManuelCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 1995
  3. United States v. JohnstonUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1987
  4. United States v. LayneUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1989
  5. United States v. BrownU.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review · 1984

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API