Legal Opinion

United States v. Hatfield

Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces

Decided April 16, 1996No. 96-6001; Crim.App. No. 95 0991PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion of the Court

COX, Chief Judge:

This is a speedy-trial appeal. At trial, the military judge granted appellant’s in limine motion to dismiss the Charges and specifications for want of a speedy trial. Art. 10, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 USC § 810. The Government took an interlocutory appeal of this ruling to the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals. Art. 62, UCMJ, 10 USC § 862 (1983). That court held that, under the circumstances, “the military judge erred as a matter of law” in granting appellant’s motion. Accordingly, the court granted the government appeal…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. United States v. KossmanUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1993
  2. United States v. KingUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1990
  3. United States v. WattenbargerUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1985
  4. United States v. HatfieldNavy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals · 1995

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. United States v. MizgalaCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2005
  2. United States v. CooperCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2003
  3. United States v. AndersonCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 1999
  4. United States v. McLaughlinCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 1999
  5. United States v. WarnerU S Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals · 2003

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API