United States v. Simonds
United States Court of Military Appeals
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partFeRguson, Judge
I concur in part and dissent in part.
For the reasons set forth in my dissenting opinion in United States v Waldron, 15 USCMA 628, 36 CMR 126, I agree that the law officer did not err in refusing sua sponte to declare a mistrial. Here, as in the Waldron case, the question presented by the copy of the charges against the witness Moore was whether such affected the members concerned in giving the parties to the trial a fair hearing. This ordinarily calls for use of the challenging procedure and, as did the prosecution in Waldron, supra, the defense counsel failed to invoke the same. That, in my…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- United States v. RowanUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1954
- United States v. VillasenorUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1955
- United States v. StephenUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1965
- United States v. WaldronUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1966
- United States v. MountsUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1952
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.