Legal Opinion

Loving v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces

Decided September 29, 2006No. 06-8006/ARPublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Chief Judge GIERKE

delivered the opinion of the Court.

I. INTRODUCTION

Senior Judge Robinson O. Everett, writing for this Court, once quoted the fundamental *134legal maxim, ‘“Always salt down the facts first; the law will keep.’ ”1 He reaffirmed this point with this intuitive observation, “ ‘In the very nature of things, it is impossible for a court to enter a valid judgment declaring the rights of parties to litigation until the facts on which those rights depend have been “salted down” in a manner sanctioned by law.’ ”2 Although we address several issues here, the pivotal issue is whether this…

2Cases cited59 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  3. Williams v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  4. Blakely v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  5. Teague v. LaneSupreme Court of the United States · 1989

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

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Denedo v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2008
  2. Loving v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2009
  3. United States v. LaBellaCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2015
  4. Armann v. McKeanCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2008
  5. United States v. Private E1 RONALD GRAYArmy Court of Criminal Appeals · 2012

15 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