Legal Opinion
United States v. Pauling
Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces
Decided July 1, 2004No. 02-0603/ARPublishedCited by 47 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Judge GIERKE
delivered the opinion of the Court.
This ease concerns how to charge a “double forgery,” which occurs where a check has both “a forged payor signature and a forged indorsement.” Black’s Law Dictionary 661 (7th ed.1999). Forging a drawer’s signature on a check violates Article 123, Uniform Code of Military Justice [hereinafter UCMJ], 10 U.S.C. § 923 (2000). Forging an indorser’s signature on a check also violates Article 123. Where both the drawer’s signature and the indorser’s signature are forged on the same check, has one forgery offense occurred or two? We hold that the…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Blockburger v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
- United States v. QuirozCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2001
- United States v. FosterUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1994
- United States v. FairclothCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 1996
- United States v. LloydCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 1997
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by47 opinions
- United States v. CampbellCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2012
- United States v. RoderickCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2006
- United States v. WheelerUnited States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals · 2017
- United States v. PaxtonCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2007
- United States v. SchweitzerCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2009
42 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.