Legal Opinion

United States v. Brunelle

United States Court of Military Appeals

Decided October 10, 1978No. 33,897; NCM 76-0409PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion of the Court

2Per curiam

We granted review to consider the effect of the failure to serve on defense counsel a copy of a second post-trial review by the staff judge advocate that had been mandated by the Court of Military Review, and three assignments of error dealing with different aspects of an alleged illegal search.

The Government concedes the “record does not indicate that a copy of” the second review was served on defense counsel as required by United States v. Goode, 1 M.J. 3 (C.M.A.1975). In United States v. Hill, 3 M.J. 295, 297 (C.M.A.1977), we held that “the purpose of Goode can be…

3Cases cited4 opinions

  1. United States v. GoodeUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1975
  2. United States v. HillUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1977
  3. United States v. MartinezUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1976
  4. United States v. KingUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1976

4Cited by2 opinions

  1. United States v. D'AielloU.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review · 1979
  2. United States v. LucyUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1979

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

Powered by the Exa API