United States v. Bledsoe
U.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review
1Opinion of the Court
MOLLISON, Senior Judge:
The single issue in this remand from the United States Court of Military Appeals is whether the appellant’s case was appropriately considered under Chief of Naval Operations Instruction (OPNAVINST) 1752.2, which publishes policy and program guidance for the Family Advocacy Program (FAP). We conclude that it was and reaffirm.
Consistent with his pleas of guilty, the appellant was found guilty of sodomy with a child, assault with intent to commit rape, and indecent acts upon a child, in violation of Articles 125 and 134, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. §§ 925,…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- United States v. CaceresSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- United States v. AllenUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1991
- United States v. WeissUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1992
- United States v. GrafUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1992
- United States v. AllenU.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review · 1990
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- United States v. Flores-GalarzaU.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review · 1994
- United States v. ThomasNavy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals · 1995
- United States v. BrownU.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review · 1994
- United States v. CorcoranUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1994
- Matthews v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. Guam · 2011