United States v. Vickers

CEDARBURG, Chief Judge:

Appellant asserts two interrelated assignments of error:

I

THE STAFF JUDGE ■ ADVOCATE’S POST-TRIAL REVIEW PROVIDED IMPROPER STANDARDS FOR REASSESSING THE SENTENCE TO PURGE TRIAL ERROR, AND WAS OTHERWISE MISLEADING.

II

THE CONVENING [sic] AUTHORITY DID NOT MEANINGFULLY REASSESS THE SENTENCE BASED ON PROPER STANDARDS.

At his special court-martial, appellant was convicted, contrary to his pleas, of one specification alleging willful disobedience of a lawful command from a known superior commissioned officer, a violation of Article 90, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), 10…