Legal Opinion

United States v. Clark

U.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review

Decided August 13, 1993No. NMCM 92 1012PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MOLLISON, Judge:

This appeal from a special court-martial conviction concerns whether Rule for Courts-Martial (R.C.M.) 701(a)(5), Manual for Courts-Martial, United States, 1984, requires the trial counsel to disclose to the defense written material the Government may offer solely to rebut matters which the accused may offer in extenuation and mitigation during the presentencing procedure. We conclude that trial counsel has no obligation to disclose such rebuttal under the rule.

*1100Consistent with his pleas, the appellant was found guilty of two periods of unauthorized absence in violation of…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. United States v. BanksUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1992
  2. United States v. LucasUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1951
  3. United States v. TrimperUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1989
  4. United States v. GarcesUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1991
  5. United States v. GrahamUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1983

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. United States v. Flores-GalarzaU.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review · 1994
  2. United States v. FergusonU.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review · 1994
  3. United States v. McGeeneyNavy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals · 1994

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

Powered by the Exa API