Legal Opinion
United States v. Accordino
United States Court of Military Appeals
Decided May 28, 1985No. 46296; ACM S25705PublishedCited by 30 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion of the Court
COX, Judge:
Two members of appellant’s special court-martial panel executed post-trial affidavits indicating in substance that, in their view, the president of the court-martial, during deliberations on findings,1 2prema-*103turely cut off the discussion and precipitated a vote. A majority of the Court of Military Review concluded that the affiants were incompetent to impeach their own verdict and refused to reach the merits of an “unlawful command influence” issue.2 15 M.J. 825, 842 (1983). We agree with Senior Judge Hemingway, concurring in the result, that the affidavits…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Clyde Mattox v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- McDonald v. PlessSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
- Parker v. GladdenSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Woodward v. LeavittMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1871
- United States v. CarrUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1984
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by30 opinions
- United States v. LovingCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 1994
- United States v. ThomasUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1986
- United States v. InghamCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 1995
- United States v. WeaslerCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 1995
- United States v. StoneUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1988
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.