United States v. Long

The military judge erred in not advising appellant of the terminal element of Charge IV, that is, that his conduct in breaking restriction was prejudicial to good order and discipline in the armed forces. RCM 910(c)(1), MCM, 1984. A military judge is presumed to know the law of the case and to apply it correctly. Applying this presumption to this case, we conclude that the military judge was aware of the existence of the terminal element, knew that the facts admitted by appellant must support a finding by the military judge that the acts constituted such conduct, and “concluded as a matter of…