Legal Opinion · Concurrence

United States v. Collins

Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces

Decided August 25, 2004No. 01-0664/ARPublished

1ConcurrenceCrawford, Chief Judge

Because there is a reasonable doubt that a different verdict might result if a trier of fact considers the results of the post-trial Rule for Courts-Martial 706 [hereinafter R.C.M.] inquiry directed by this Court, we should grant Appellant’s petition for a new trial.1 Rather than grant this well-supported relief, the majority unnecessarily rejects decades of settled practice in this area, applying de novo review to find error. In so doing, the majority gravely confuses the concept of mental capacity with the defense of mental responsibility and changes the obligation on military judges. I…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. United States v. TraversUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1987
  2. United States v. John David BartlettCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1988
  3. United States v. JemmingsUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1976
  4. United States v. QuintanillaCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2001
  5. United States v. MillerCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 1997

15 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