United States v. Pruitt
Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
LARSON, CMef Judge:
TMs ease presents the question of what remedies are available to an appellant whose pretrial agreement contains a provision found, at the appellate level, to be invalid. After striking the offending provision, we provided the appellant the opportumty to withdraw Ms guilty pleas and return to trial to pursue the course of action wMch had been barred by the invalid provision. He chose to forego that opportumty and to persist in his pleas. Accordingly, we find Ms pleas to be provident, and we affirm the findings of guilty and the sentence.
Pursuant to Ms pleas, the appellant…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- United States v. BurtonUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1971
- Weiss v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- United States v. KossmanUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1993
- United States v. CummingsUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1968
- United States v. HollandUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1975
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- United States v. BirgeCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 1999
- United States v. BruciNavy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals · 2000
- United States v. BenitezNavy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals · 1998