United States v. Fox
Army Court of Criminal Appeals
1Per curiam
We have examined the record of trial, the assignments of error,1 and the Government’s response thereto. We conclude that the findings and sentence are correct in law and fact and that no error materially prejudicial to the substantial rights of the appellant was committed.
Consistent with her guilty pleas, the appellant was convicted at a special court-martial, military judge alone, of forgery of a signature on a check, uttering the forged check, and stealing mail matter (the check), in violation of Articles 123 and 134, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. §§ 923 and 934 (1994)…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- United States v. PraterUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1991
- United States v. SnellingUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1982
- Weiss v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- United States v. LoganUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1973
- United States v. LorenzenUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1955
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- United States v. FoxCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 1999