United States v. Newman
U.S. Army Court of Military Review
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
ADAMKEWICZ, Senior Judge:
The appellant was convicted, pursuant to his pleas, of two specifications of larceny (Specifications 2 and 3 of Charge I) and one of forgery (Charge II), in violation of Articles 121 and 123, respectively, of the Uniform Code of Military Justice [hereinafter UCMJ], 10 U.S.C. §§ 921 and 923 (1982), respectively. On appeal before this court he alleges for the first time, and the government concedes, that the forgery charge is multiplicious for findings with the larceny alleged in Specification 3 of Charge I. We disagree.
The providence inquiry and the…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Glasser v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
- United States v. BakerUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1983
- United States v. AlefUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1977
- United States v. HoltUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1983
- United States v. ByrdUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1987
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- United States v. AllisonU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1990
- United States v. ConfortiU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1988
- United States v. IgnatkoU.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review · 1991
- United States v. LewisU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1989
- United States v. ThompsonU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1989