Legal Opinion · Concurrence

United States v. Warren

U S Air Force Court of Military Review

Decided December 2, 1980No. ACM S24904Published

1ConcurrenceKastl, Judge

I agree that trial counsel’s argument was legally permissible in this particular case. Under any fair reading of the record, accused told a “cock-and-bull story” in his sworn testimony; it was not improper for the court members to conclude that accused had lied and to consider such factor in fashioning a sentence.

In my judgment, such sentencing considerations may be permitted in only a limited range of cases. Upon slightly different facts, I would not hesitate to reach a contrary result.

As a possible aid for those facing such problems in the future, I will set forth: (a) relevant Federal…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. North Carolina v. PearceSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  2. United States v. GraysonSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  3. United States v. DoctorUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1956
  4. United States v. MackUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1980
  5. United States v. Wincel HendrixCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1974

19 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