United States v. Walker
U.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review
1Per curiam
We have examined the record of trial, the assignment of error, and the Government’s reply thereto and have concluded that the findings and sentence are correct in law and fact and that no error materially prejudicial to the substantial rights of the appellant was committed.
The military judge’s thirty-day authorized leave is not the brief absence contemplated by R.C.M. 1104(a)(2)(B) so that it was necessary to delay the post-trial proceedings until the military judge returned to authenticate the record. Rather this was a patently prolonged absence which triggers substitute authentication…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- United States v. Cruz-RijosUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1976
- United States v. SkaarU.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review · 1985
- United States v. LottUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1980
3Cited by3 opinions
- United States v. MahlerNavy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals · 1998
- United States v. BatisteU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1992
- United States v. GibsonNavy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals · 1999