Legal Opinion

United States v. Manuel

U S Air Force Court of Military Review

Decided December 7, 1979No. ACM S24749PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DECISION

HERMAN, Senior Judge:

While we find that one who encourages a thief not to return stolen property is an accessory after the fact, we set aside the sentence as a result of the trial judge’s error in effectively placing a burden upon the accused to present evidence in order to avoid a bad conduct discharge.

A military judge sitting as a special court-martial convicted the accused, consonant with his pleas, of accessory after the fact to larceny, of a subsequent unrelated larceny, and of willful destruction of an M-16 rifle, violations of Articles 78, 121, and 108, respectively, of the…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. United States v. GoodeUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1975
  2. Government of the Virgin Islands v. Vidal Galdon Aquino, Government of the Virgin Islands v. Ishmael Guillerma ReyesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1967
  3. United States v. Walter J. Barlow, Jr.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1972
  4. United States v. ParkerUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1955
  5. Neal v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1939

19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. United States v. ThomasU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1984
  2. United States v. HardyU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1990
  3. United States v. SnipesU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1985

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API