Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

United States v. Black

United States Court of Military Appeals

Decided May 27, 1983No. ACM 23496Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partSnyder, Judge

I concur with the conclusion that the accused did not receive ineffective representation during the trial. However, I must disassociate myself from the holding that the accused received inadequate representation during the post-trial proceedings. Therefore, I dissent.

My fellow judges have decided that trial defense counsel was inadequate as a result of his failure to adequately respond to the review of the staff judge advocate (hereinafter, the review). The perceived inadequacy was the failure to detect the “inaccurate” statement that the accused was not a volunteer for the 3320th Correction…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. United States v. GoodeUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1975
  2. United States v. PaleniusUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1977
  3. United States v. BarnesUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1977
  4. United States v. DupreeUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1952
  5. United States v. MorrisonUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1977

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

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

Powered by the Exa API