United States v. Fairchild
United States Court of Military Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
DECISION UPON FURTHER REVIEW
KASTL, Senior Judge:
Continuing jurisdiction over the accused is the critical issue in this case. Finding in personam jurisdiction present, we affirm the accused’s conviction for larceny, in violation of Article 121, U.C.M.J., 10 U.S.C. § 921.
This case was before us earlier. In United States v. Fairchild, 14 M.J. 918 (A.F.C.M.R.1982), we noted that the accused was disputing jurisdiction for the first time on appeal, claiming that his offense of larceny occurred prior to his discharge and reenlistment, thereby preempting military jurisdiction over him. United States…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- United States v. DuBayUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1967
- United States v. ClardyUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1982
- United States v. HoutUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1970
- United States v. BarbeauU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1980
- United States v. GinyardUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1967
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- United States v. FairchildU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1991