Legal Opinion · Dissent

United States v. Patterson

United States Court of Military Appeals

Decided August 11, 1967No. 19,985Published

1DissentQuinn, Chief Judge

In my opinion, the evidence in a particular record of trial may demonstrate the absence of any risk of prejudice from the erroneous instruction. See my dissent in United States v Schoenberg, 17 USCMA 145, 37 CMR 409; State v Swisher, 364 Mo 157, 260 SW 2d 6 (1953). Appellate defense counsel refer to differences in the testimony of several of the witnesses, but none relate to “a material fact” in the case. Considered in the light of the testimony and the issues of fact to be decided by the court-martial, the instruction presents no fair risk of prejudice. I would, therefore, answer the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. State v. SwisherSupreme Court of Missouri · 1953
  2. United States v. SchoenbergUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1967

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

Powered by the Exa API