Legal Opinion · Dissent

United States v. Gavitt

U.S. Army Court of Military Review

Decided June 18, 1993No. ACMR 9200764Published

1DissentDe Giulio, Senior Judge

I dissent for several reasons. I do not believe there is error in this case.1 The majority is too quick to set aside the convening authority’s action.2 Apparently, my brothers would require an order or writing in the record of trial which would designate the Staff Judge Advocate of the 3d Infantry Division, Colonel Beardall,3 as the Staff Judge Advocate for the Berlin Brigade in this case. There is no doubt that such a writing would make the matter perfectly clear. After the decision of the majority in this case, a writing assigning an officer as the staff judge advocate is probably required.…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. United States v. MasusockUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1951
  2. United States v. JetteUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1987
  3. United States v. YatesUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1989
  4. United States v. MoschellaUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1971
  5. United States v. KemaUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1959

5 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