United States v. Pilkington
Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces
1Opinion of the Court
Chief Judge COX
delivered the opinion of the Court.
Appellant was convicted, pursuant to his pleas at a special court-martial, of conspiracy to maltreat subordinates, maltreatment of subordinates (5 specifications), making a false official statement, and assault (2 specifications). Arts. 81, 93, 107, and 128, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 USC §§ 881, 893, 907, and 928, respectively.
We are asked by appellant to decide whether the convening authority had the power to approve post-trial modifications to the original pretrial agreement. See 50 MJ 214 (1998).
Appellant’s original agreement…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- United States v. AcevedoCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 1999
- United States v. RiveraCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 1997
- United States v. DawsonCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 1999
- United States v. PilkingtonNavy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals · 1998
3Cited by6 opinions
- United States v. ParkerCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2006
- United States v. HudsonU S Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals · 2003
- United States v. ParkerNavy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals · 2004
- United States v. HudsonU S Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals · 2003
- United States v. ParkerCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2006
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.