Legal Opinion
United States v. Hill
Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces
Decided September 30, 1996No. 95-1136; Crim.App. No. 1026PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FLAUM, Circuit Judge: *
This appeal presents a comprehensive challenge to the practice of court-martial members asking questions of witnesses diming trial, at least to the extent that the quantity and quality of the questions in the current case allegedly reflect a lack of impartiality. See generally United States v. Dotson, 21 USCMA 79, 44 CMR 133 (1971). Appellant alleges that the military judge in this case failed to properly circumscribe the range of the members’ exercise of that practice. Finally, appellant claims that the military judge abused her discretion in denying the defense’s…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- United States of America, Appellee-Cross-Appellant v. Mohammad Ajmal, Defendant-Appellant-Cross-Appellee, Muhammad Afzal and Hassan Sabghat UllahkhanCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1995
- United States v. PrevatteUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1994
- United States v. McLarenUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1993
- United States v. Gary BushCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1995
- United States v. Robert Lee KarnesCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1976
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- United States v. BurtonCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2000
- United States v. AcostaCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 1998
- United States v. FosterCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2007
- United States v. CooperCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 1999
- United States v. AndreozziArmy Court of Criminal Appeals · 2004
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.