Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion · Dissent

United States v. Houston

United States Court of Military Appeals

Decided November 17, 1967No. 20,374Published

1DissentQuinn, Chief Judge

The Uniform Code of Military Justice, the Manual for Courts-Martial, and the several opinions, including my own, in United States v Hooper, 5 USCMA 391, 18 CMR 15, require affirmance of the decision of the board of review.

From the standpoint of two of the three opinions in the Hooper case, none of the Manual provisions dealing with a difference in armed force between that of the accused and the court-martial is jurisdictional in nature. The import of these opinions is that a failure to comply with any of the Manual provisions regulating the exercise of “reciprocal jurisdiction” does not…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. United States v. BoundUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1952
  2. United States v. BaldwinUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1967
  3. United States v. GrayUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1956
  4. United States v. GomesUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1953
  5. United States v. DycheUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1957

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

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

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API