United States v. Hill
U.S. Army Court of Military Review
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
CLAUSE, Senior Judge:
Contrary to his pleas, appellant was convicted of two specifications of robbery and one specification of aggravated assault in violation of Articles 122 and 128, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), 10 U.S.C. §§ 928 and 922, respectively.
*951There are several errors assigned by appellant which merit discussion.
Speedy Trial
In his first assigned error, appellant alleges, as he did at trial, a violation of the rule of United States v. Burton, 21 U.S.C. M.A. 112, 44 C.M.R. 166 (1971) in that he was not brought to trial until after 177 days of pretrial…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- United States v. BurtonUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1971
- United States v. Cruz-RijosUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1976
- United States v. SturdivantUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1976
- United States v. TriplettUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1972
- United States v. GaiterUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1975
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- United States v. BadgerU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1979
- United States v. RaineyU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1976
- United States v. RaineyU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1976