Legal Opinion

United States v. Jolliff

United States Court of Military Appeals

Decided January 12, 1973No. 26,320PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion of the Court

2Per curiam

Article 6(c), Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 USC § 806 prohibits any person who has acted as investigating officer in any case from later acting as “a staff judge advocate or legal officer to any reviewing authority upon the same case.” Here, the Article 32 investigating officer later prepared a draft of the post-trial review which became the basis of the formal advice by the staff judge advocate to the convening authority. It is apparent, therefore, that contrary to the command of Article 6(c), thé Article 32 officer “assist[ed] in inducing the approval” of the…

3Cases cited4 opinions

  1. United States v. CoulterUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1954
  2. United States v. CrunkUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1954
  3. United States v. HightowerUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1955
  4. United States v. MarshUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1970

4Cited by4 opinions

  1. United States v. StirewaltCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2004
  2. United States v. TaylorCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2004
  3. United States v. StirewaltCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2004
  4. United States v. TaylorCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2004

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

Powered by the Exa API