Legal Opinion
United States v. Sumrall
Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces
Decided September 30, 1996No. 95-0720, Crim. App. No. 31151PublishedCited by 25 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion of the Court
SULLIVAN, Judge:
My object all sublime I shall achieve in time to let the punishment fit the crime— the punishment fit the crime.[1]
This is a case where we must measure the sentence of a court-martial against the yardstick of the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution.
Appellant was tried by a general court martial composed of a military judge sitting alone at Ramstein Air Base, Germany, on February 24, 1994. In accordance with his pleas, he was found guilty of committing indecent acts with a female under the age of 16 years (2 specifications), in…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Board of Regents of State Colleges v. RothSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Harmelin v. MichiganSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- United States v. HalperSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Austin v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- McCarty v. McCartySupreme Court of the United States · 1981
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- United States v. ReedCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2000
- United States v. MaxwellCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 1996
- United States v. GreavesCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 1997
- United States v. BoydCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2001
- United States v. BeckerCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 1997
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.