United States v. Bell
Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
LUCAS, Judge:
We have examined the record of trial, the assignments of error1, and the Government’s response thereto, and we have concluded that the findings and the sentence are correct in law and fact and that no error materially prejudicial to the substantial rights of the appellant was committed. We hold that there was no illegal pretrial confinement and no prejudice suffered by the appellant because of substantial post-trial review delay.
Pursuant to his pleas, the appellant was convicted by a general court-martial of multiple violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice [UCMJ], 10…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Gerstein v. PughSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- County of Riverside v. McLaughlinSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- United States v. BanksUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1979
- Courtney v. WilliamsUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1976
- United States v. LynchUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1982
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- United States v. BellCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 1997