Legal Opinion
United States v. Kepple
U S Air Force Court of Military Review
Decided December 13, 1988No. ACM 26863PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DECISION
KASTL, Senior Judge:
When does a stipulation become “confessional,” thus triggering the need to caution an accused prior to its use in a contested case?
Today we seek to describe — with some precision — the legal tripwires which activate such a forewarning under the rule taken from United States v. Bertelson, 3 M.J. 314 (C.M.A.1977).
Factual Setting
Airman Basic (AB) Kepple was tried by a military judge sitting alone as a general court-martial for desertion, the period of his absence being from May 1983 to March 1988. He pleaded not guilty to desertion under Article 85, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. §…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- United States v. CareUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1969
- United States v. BertelsonUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1977
- United States v. Marie L. FerreboeufCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1980
- United States v. John Craige TerrackCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1975
- United States v. Julius Carroll RobertsonCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1983
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- United States v. HoneycuttUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1990
- United States v. SassamanU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1991
- United States v. FloydU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1990
- United States v. HoneycuttU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1989
- United States v. PenaUnited States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals · 1998
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.