Legal Opinion · Concurrence

United States v. Hines

U S Air Force Court of Military Review

Decided July 6, 1984No. ACM 24002Published

1ConcurrenceHodgson, Chief Judge

Contrary to the impression created by the lead opinion there has developed in the Courts of Military Review a significant body of jurisprudence interpreting and applying the residual hearsay exception of Mil.R.Evid. 803(24) and 804(b)(5). United States v. Crayton, 17 M.J. 932 (A.F.C.M.R. 1984); United States v. White, 17 M.J. 953 (A.F.C.M.R.1984); United States v. Ruffin, 12 M.J. 952 (A.F.C.M.R.), pet. denied, 13 M.J. 494 (1982); United States v. Thornton, 16 M.J. 1011 (A.C.M.R.1983); United States v. King, 16 M.J. 990 (A.C.M.R.1983); United States v. Whalen, 15 M.J. 872 (A.C.M.R.1983);…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. United States v. CraytonU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1984
  2. United States v. WhalenU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1983
  3. United States v. RuffinU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1982
  4. United States v. KingUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1983
  5. United States v. PowellU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1984

3 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