Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

United States v. Miller

U S Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals

Decided October 19, 2005No. CGCMS 24292; Docket No. 001-69-05Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partFelicetti, Judge

(concurring in part and dissenting in part), in which KANTOR, Judge joins.

We concur with permitting SN Miller to withdraw his case from appellate review. He has been fully informed by competent defense counsel on numerous occasions about the consequences of either waiving or withdrawing from appellate review. It has always been his desire to avoid appellate review and we should respect his request.

We also concur with the majority’s unstated holding that this Court is prohibited from granting a requested withdrawal from appellate review when a case is referred by the Judge Advocate General…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. United States v. SmithCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 1996
  2. United States v. HernandezUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1991
  3. United States v. HaynesU S Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals · 2000
  4. United States v. SmithUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1992
  5. United States v. GreeningU S Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals · 2001

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

Powered by the Exa API