Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

United States v. Stricklin

United States Court of Military Appeals

Decided June 22, 1971No. 23,728Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partFerguson, Senior Judge

I concur in part and dissent in part.

I agree that there is in this record sufficient independent evidence to corroborate the accused’s confession. Paragraph 140a (5), Manual for Courts-Martial, United States, 1969 (Revised edition). However, I do not agree with my brothers’ holding that the accused was not prejudiced as to sentence by the erroneous advice in the post-trial review of the staff judge advocate. United States v Lopes, 20 USCMA 495, 43 CMR 335 (1971); United States v Hamilton, 20 USCMA 519, 43 CMR 359 (1971).

The supervisory authority is, in the court-martial process, an…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. United States v. RiveraUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1970
  2. United States v. HamiltonUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1971
  3. United States v. LopesUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1971
  4. United States v. PodgurskiUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1965

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

Powered by the Exa API