Schmeltz v. United States
United States Court of Military Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
2Per curiam
By our decision in this case1 dated April 11, 1975, we ruled that the Navy Court of Military Review did not err in holding that the condition in the petitioner’s pretrial agreement requiring him to request sentencing by military judge was valid under the circumstances of that ease. On July 23, 1975, we granted a petition for writ of error coram nobis to reexamine2 our disposition of his case in light of our subsequent decision in United States v. Holland, 23 U.S.C.M.A. 442, 50 C.M.R. 461, 1 M.J. 58 (1975). In addition to the provision above referenced, the petitioner’s…
3Cases cited3 opinions
- United States v. HollandUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1975
- United States v. SchmeltzUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1975
- Brant v. United StatesUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1970
4Cited by13 opinions
- United States v. BertelsonUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1977
- United States v. ZelenskiUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1987
- United States v. CassityU.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review · 1992
- United States v. LibecapU S Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals · 2002
- United States v. MartinU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1978
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.