Legal Opinion

United States v. Emerson

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

Decided August 27, 1981No. NMCM 81 1183PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

BAUM, Senior Judge.

Appellant has assigned one error before this Court, that:

THE COURT-MARTIAL WAS JURIS-DICTIONALLY DEFECTIVE BECAUSE IT INCLUDED A COURT MEMBER NOT FROM THE NAVAL SERVICE.

The convening order for appellant’s special court-martial appointed five officer-members, four from the U. S. Navy and U. S. Naval Reserve and one from the U. S. Coast Guard. Appellant argues that “[t]he record does not even hint, let alone show, that authority to appoint a Coast Guard officer was sought or obtained [pursuant to the requirements of paragraph 4g(3), Manual for Courts-Martial, 1969 (Rev.)].”…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. United States v. MasusockUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1951
  2. United States v. RyanUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1978
  3. United States v. BancroftUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1953
  4. United States v. HoustonUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1967

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. United States v. HiltonU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1990

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

Powered by the Exa API