United States v. Harris

I would affirm the decision of the Court of Military Review for the reasons expressed in my dissents in United States v Rivera, 20 USCMA 6, 42 CMR 198 (1970), and United States v Boatner, 20 USCMA 376, 43 CMR 216 (1971).

I concur in part and dissent in part.

I agree only with that part of the principal opinion which holds a new post-trial proceeding in regard to sentence is required because of the failure of the staff judge advocate to advise the convening authority that the accused’s company commander had recommended that he not be eliminated from the service. United States v Rivera, 20 USCMA…