United States v. Anderson
U.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review
1Opinion of the Court
KERCHEVAL, Judge.
Appellant asserts two assignments of error for our consideration. The first, a jurisdictional issue, is summarily rejected in accordance with United States v. Stone, 8 M.J. 140 (C.M.A.1979). We find, however, appellant’s second assignment to have merit.
In his second assignment appellant asserts as error the introduction into evidence of Prosecution Exhibits 1 and 2 during the presentencing stage of his trial. Prosecution Exhibit 1 was an Enlisted Performance Evaluation and Prosecution Exhibit 2 was a Page 13 from appellant’s service record. The basis of appellant’s assertion…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- United States Ex Rel. Accardi v. ShaughnessySupreme Court of the United States · 1954
- American Farm Lines v. Black Ball Freight ServiceSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- United States v. RussoUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1975
- United States v. MackUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1980
- United States v. MasusockUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1951
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- United States v. CorcoranUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1994
- United States v. HoxsieU.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review · 1982
- United States v. DonohueU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1990