Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

United States v. Boyett

U S Air Force Court of Military Review

Decided July 2, 1993No. ACM 29345Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

DIXON, Chief Judge,

joined by Senior Judges O’HAIR, LEONARD, and McLAUTHLIN (concurring in part and dissenting in part):

I concur in the majority disposition of this case except for the affirmance of specification 5 of the Charge. In my view, the trial judge erred by denying the defense motion to dismiss this specification as a matter of law. I believe existing legal precedent requires this Court to find appellant’s plea of guilty to specification 5 improvident.16 I would dismiss specification 5 and affirm the sentence as adjudged.17

Given the statutory mandate of Article 66, UCMJ, this Court…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. United States v. JohannsU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1983
  2. United States v. WalesUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1990
  3. United States v. AppelUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1990
  4. United States v. ParrilloU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1990
  5. United States v. ArthenU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1990

2 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