Legal Opinion
United States v. Terrell
U S Air Force Court of Military Review
Decided December 7, 1977No. ACM 22273PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ARROWOOD, Judge:
Appellate defense counsel assert that the accused, being tried for off-base transfer of heroin,1 received ineffective as*721sistance of counsel when his trial defense counsel did not move to strike the direct testimony of a government witness who invoked his privilege against self-incrimination. The only question the witness refused to answer was directed to his general credibility and did not relate to the specific offense charged. In this situation the military judge was not required even on motion, to expunge the direct testimony. United States v. LaRiche, et al., 549 F.2d 1088…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Relford v. Commandant, US Disciplinary Barracks, Fort LeavenworthSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- United States v. John Cardillo, Lawrence Harris, Ralph Kaminsky, John Knapp, Louis Margolis, and Louis PiselliCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1963
- United States v. McCarthyUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1976
- United States v. RivasUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1977
- United States v. HedlundUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1976
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- United States v. RichardsonUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1983
- United States v. DennisUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1983
- United States v. PhaneufU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1981
- United States v. WordenU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1984
- United States v. KrampfU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1980
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.