Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

United States v. Baca

United States Court of Military Appeals

Decided August 12, 1966No. 19,314Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partQuinn, Chief Judge

(concurring in the result) :

The president of a special court-martial has responsibilities that transcend his role as a court member. For example, he alone is responsible for determining proper instructions on applicable rules of law, United States v Pinkston, 6 USCMA 700, 21 CMR 22; and his instructions are not subject to objection by any court member. United States v Bridges, 12 USCMA 96, 30 CMR 96. In this area, therefore, he certainly has the right to confer with counsel and the accused out of the presence of the other court members. Moreover, the Manual for Courts-Martial, United States,…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. United States v. JohnpierUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1961
  2. United States v. PinkstonUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1956
  3. United States v. BridgesUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1961
  4. United States v. NorwoodUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1966
  5. United States v. BruceUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1961

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

Powered by the Exa API