Legal Opinion
United States v. Solomon
Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces
Decided May 8, 2013No. 13-0025/MCPublishedCited by 83 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Judge STUCKY
delivered the opinion of the Court: 1
We granted review to determine whether the military judge abused his discretion when he admitted evidence under Military Rule of Evidence (M.R.E.) 413, and whether trial counsel’s closing arguments on findings constituted prosecutorial misconduct amounting to plain error. We hold that the military judge’s admission of M.R.E. 413 evidence was an abuse of discretion. We therefore need not decide whether trial counsel’s closing arguments were error.
I
Appellant, who was tried at a general court-martial composed of members with enlisted…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Huddleston v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- United States v. MannsCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2000
- United States v. WrightCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2000
- United States v. McCollumCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2003
- United States v. MahoneyCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2003
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by83 opinions
- United States v. HillsCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2016
- United States v. HukillCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2017
- United States v. CommissoCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2017
- United States v. BassNavy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals · 2015
- United States v. Staff Sergeant JEFFERY G. BARNES, JR.Army Court of Criminal Appeals · 2015
78 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.