Legal Opinion · Dissent

United States v. Warner

Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces

Decided December 6, 2013No. 13-0435/ARPublished

1DissentBaker, Chief Judge

The question presented by this case is whether a reasonable member of the armed forces would have fair notice that possession of images charged under Specification 3 were of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces and thus subject to Article 134 sanction. Article 134, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 934 (2012). Specification 3 charged Appellant with possession of “some images that depict minors as sexual objects or in a sexually suggestive way.” The images depict young prepubescent and pubescent girls in sexually suggestive positions. In several of these images, girls are dressed as prostitutes…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Parker v. LevySupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  2. In Re GrimleySupreme Court of the United States · 1890
  3. United States v. SullivanCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 1995
  4. United States v. AshbyCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2009
  5. United States v. VaughanCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2003

17 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