Legal Opinion

United States v. Clarke

U.S. Army Court of Military Review

Decided March 22, 1982No. CM 440834PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

FULTON, Senior Judge:

The issue presented by this appeal is whether a plea of guilty to the offense of violating a general regulation is to be held improvident because the trial judge did not explain in particular detail to the accused the provisions of the regulation violated. There is also a question as to the maximum punishment.

I

The first issue comes about by virtue of the provisions of Fort Campbell Regulation 190-5 as follows:

2. DRUG PARAPHERNALIA. It shall be unlawful and a criminal offense for any person to possess, have under his control, or deliver any device,…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. United States v. DavenportUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1980
  2. United States v. HardenUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1976
  3. United States v. HughesUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1976
  4. United States v. CrouchUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1981
  5. United States v. WallerUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1977

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. United States v. SheehanU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1983
  2. United States v. BradleyU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1983
  3. United States v. FriedmanU S Coast Guard Court of Military Review · 1982
  4. United States v. DeSotoU.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review · 1982
  5. United States v. DeSotoU.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review · 1982

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

Powered by the Exa API