Legal Opinion

United States v. Turk

U.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review

Decided May 29, 1986No. Misc. Dkt. No. 86-03PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MIELCZARSKI, Judge:

This is a Government appeal seeking reversal of a military judge’s ruling granting a defense motion to dismiss charges because of a failure to bring appellee to trial within the 120 day period specified by R.C.M. 707(a). We reverse the military judge’s decision and remand for further proceedings.

The charges allege that on 17 June 1985 appellee missed movement of his unit, the USS TATTNALL (DDG-19) then located at Naval Station, Mayport, Florida, and began an unauthorized absence of 142 days. Subsequently, on 6 November 1985 appellee terminated his absence by surrendering at…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. United States v. BurrisUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1985
  2. United States v. LillyU.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review · 1986
  3. United States v. RobertsonU.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review · 1985

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. United States v. TurkUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1987
  2. United States v. MarescaU.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review · 1988
  3. United States v. MillerU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1988
  4. United States v. BradfordU.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review · 1987
  5. United States v. CampbellU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1991

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API