United States v. Anderson

The principal opinion does an admirable job of supporting my brothers’ conclusion that the trial judge did the right thing for the wrong reason. I write because the law does not preclude us from — but rather directs us toward — adopting a standard of review which avoids such after-the-fact justifications or rationalizations altogether in the present case. “[Sjimplicity ..., fairness ..., and the elimination of unjustifiable expense and delay” dictate a threshold inquiry. Rule for Courts-Martial 102, Manual for Courts-Martial, United States (1995 ed.) [hereinafter R.C.M.]

I would require the…