United States v. Marshall
United States Court of Military Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Darden, Chief Judge:
This case, which results from an offense that occurred after our decision in United States v Burton, 21 USCMA 112, 118, 44 CMR 166, 172 (1971), tests the meaning of this language from the opinion in that case:
For offenses occurring after the date of this opinion ... in the absence of defense requests for continuance, a presumption of an Article 10 violation will exist when pretrial confinement exceeds three months. In such cases, this presumption will place a heavy burden on the Government to show diligence, and in the absence of such a showing the…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Barker v. WingoSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Strunk v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- United States v. BurtonUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1971
- United States v. PraterUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1971
- United States v. MladjenUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1969
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- United States v. MizgalaCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2005
- United States v. MizgalaCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2005
- United States v. ThompsonCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2010
- United States v. ThompsonCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2010