Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

United States v. Crowley

U.S. Army Court of Military Review

Decided July 20, 1977No. SPCM 12550Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partCostello, Judge

In United States v. Green, 1 M.J. 453 (1976), the Court of Military Appeals required trial judges to inquire into certain aspects of those agreements between convening authorities and accused persons which contain any of the terms of a negotiated plea of guilty. The trial judge in this case neglected two of the required inquiries, the “openness” and “unanimity” provisions of Green, and we must decide the consequences of his neglect.1 Appellant has not asserted that there was a hidden agreement which the openness inquiry would have disclosed; nor has he posited any difference of understanding…

2Cases cited27 opinions

  1. McCarthy v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  2. United States v. CareUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1969
  3. Pollard v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
  4. Dowd v. United States Ex Rel. CookSupreme Court of the United States · 1951
  5. United States v. GreenUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1976

22 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