Legal Opinion · Concurrence

United States v. Newcomb

United States Court of Military Appeals

Decided May 1, 1978No. 31,188; SPCM 10434Published

1ConcurrenceCook, Judge

I agree with Judge Perry, but as he does not meet the issues tendered in Chief Judge Fletcher’s dissent, I am constrained to do so because they are important to military practice.

Chief Judge Fletcher’s pronouncement that the President’s rule-making authority is confined “to matters of trial procedure” and that he has no power in regard to the “procedural steps necessary to bring a case to trial” is contrary to 200 years of American military practice. It not only wipes out the rules prescribed by the President in the Manual for Courts-Martial, United States, 1969 (Revised edition), for…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Ex Parte ReedSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
  2. Swaim v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
  3. United States v. NixUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1965
  4. United States v. KellerUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1975
  5. United States v. KirschUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1964

4 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