Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

United States v. Riddle

Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces

Decided August 29, 1996No. 95-0184; Crim. App. No. 30107Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partCox, Chief Judge

It appears that both parties and the military judge assumed that, if appellant was lawfully married under the laws of South Carolina, it would have something to do with the outcome of this case. It would not.

Appellant was charged, inter alia, with stealing monies from the United States Government. Art. 121, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 USC § 921. In pertinent part, that statute provides:(a) Any person subject to this chapter who wrongfully takes, obtains, or withholds, by any means, from the possession of the owner or of any other person any money, personal property, or article of…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. United States v. AntonelliUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1992
  2. United States v. AnzaloneCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 1995
  3. United States v. AntonelliCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 1995

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

Powered by the Exa API