Legal Opinion · Dissent

United States v. Anderson

Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces

Decided August 25, 2000No. 99-0911/MCPublished

1DissentCrawford, Chief Judge

This case reflects the needless litigation that arises when commanders and their chief legal advisors fail to communicate directly in matters relating to the administration of military justice. See Art. 6(b), UCMJ, 10 USC § 806. While “there is nothing in the UCMJ or the Manual for Courts-Martial prohibiting a convening authority from consulting with his subordinate commanders or members of his staff other than his SJA regarding a petition for clemency,” United States v. Cornwell, 49 MJ 491, 493 (1998), personal opinions, such as the one the chief of staff appended to appellant’s post-trial…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. United States v. AndersonNavy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals · 1999
  2. United States v. CornwellCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 1998

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API