Legal Opinion

United States v. Bailey

U S Air Force Court of Military Review

Decided January 22, 1981No. ACM S24888PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DECISION

KASTL, Judge:

The issue before us is whether court-martial jurisdiction existed over the accused, who was in the process of being discharged for the convenience of the Government. Finding that the military possessed jurisdiction, we affirm.

The accused was scheduled for early separation for government convenience pursuant to Air Force Regulation 39-10.1 His Request and Authorization for Separation (AF Form 100) was dated 7 November 1979. He received an approved copy of the document on 8 November; it provided an effective separation date of Tuesday, 13 November 1979.

On Sunday, 11…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. United States v. HutchinsUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1978
  2. United States v. ScottUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1960
  3. United States v. HoutUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1970
  4. United States v. BarbeauU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1980
  5. United States v. TorresU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1977

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. State v. ArotNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2013
  2. State v. ArotNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2013
  3. United States v. LullUnited States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals · 2020

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

Powered by the Exa API