United States v. Hensler

I agree with the majority that the military judge’s instructions taken as a whole were sufficient in this case. However, I disagree with the majority opinion when it states: “We disagree with the court below that involuntary intoxication was not raised as to the *189first episode of drinking and fraternization that occurred in late June of 1990 with ATC Hoerr (specification 3 of the Charge).” 44 MJ at 188.

Curiously, the majority states no reason for its disagreement with the court below. On this question, I would agree with the court below and its detailed, reasoned analysis of this issue, as…