United States v. Miller
U.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review
1Opinion of the Court
WILLEVER, Judge:
Voluntary abandonment is not an affirmative defense to attempted criminal conduct where the actor’s purposes were frustrated by external forces, such as fear of immediate detection or apprehension. See United States v. Byrd, 24 M.J. 286 (C.M.A.1987); United States v. Walther, 30 M.J. 829 (NMCMR 1990). Appellate defense counsel assigns the following error:
THE MILITARY JUDGE IMPROPERLY ACCEPTED APPELLANT’S PLEA OF GUILTY TO ADDITIONAL CHARGE I, AS APPELLANT’S STATEMENTS DURING THE PROVIDENCE INQUIRY, "I JUST WALKED PASSED [sic] IT ... AND DIDN’T GO,” “I RECOGNIZED SOMEONE AND…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- United States v. Robert Jackson, William Scott and Martin AllenCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1977
- United States v. ByrdUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1987
- United States v. PrestoUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1987
- United States v. WaltherU.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review · 1990
3Cited by6 opinions
- United States v. WilliamsonNavy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals · 1995
- United States v. RiosU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1990
- United States v. SmauleyU.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review · 1994
- United States v. WilmothU.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review · 1991
- United States v. HarjungUnited States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals · 2020
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.