United States v. Fair
U.S. Army Court of Military Review
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
WOLD, Senior Judge:
We agree with appellant that Specifications 1 and 2 of Charge I, alleging simultaneous possession of amphetamines and cocaine, are multiplicious for findings purposes and should be consolidated. We reach the same conclusion with respect to Specifications 3 and 4 of Charge I which allege simultaneous distribution of portions of the amphetamines and cocaine appellant possessed. United States v. Harclerode, 17 M.J. 981 (A.C.M.R.1984). See United States v. Huggins, 17 M.J. 345 (C.M.A.1984) (summary disposition). We are satisfied that appellant suffered.no…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- United States v. AllenUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1984
- United States v. BakerUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1983
- United States v. HoltUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1983
- United States v. LarnerUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1976
- United States v. DossUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1983
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- United States v. BluckerU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1990
- United States v. HubbsU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1985
- United States v. BlaisU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1985
- United States v. BosticU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1985
- United States v. HarperU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1989
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.