Legal Opinion · Dissent

United States v. Harris

U.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review

Decided November 30, 1981No. NMCM 81 0171Published

1DissentGladis, Senior Judge

I dissent from the Court’s holding that the requirements of United States v. Donohew, 18 U.S.C.M.A. 149, 39 C.M.R. 149 (1969), were satisfied in this case.

Donohew requires that the record of trial contain the accused’s personal response to direct questions incorporating each of the elements of Article 38(b), Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), as well as his understanding of his entitlement thereunder. Article 38(b) provides that the accused has the right to be represented by the defense counsel detailed under Article 27(b), UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 827(b).

In this case the original convening…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. United States v. DonohewUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1969
  2. United States v. EasonUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1972
  3. United States v. MurrayUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1970
  4. United States v. KorenUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1968
  5. United States v. McGovernU.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review · 1981

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

Powered by the Exa API