Legal Opinion

United States v. Castillo

Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals

Decided September 30, 2003No. NMCCA 200101326PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DORMAN, Chief Judge:

In accordance with her pleas, the appellant was convicted at a special court-martial before military judge alone of an unauthorized absence terminated by apprehension, in violation of Article 86, Uniform Code of Military *601Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 886. She was awarded a bad-conduct discharge, confinement for 51 days, and reduction to pay grade E-l. The convening authority (CA) approved the sentence as adjudged.

We have examined the record of trial and conclude that the findings and the sentence, as modified herein, are correct in law and fact. Following our corrective action, no…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Hutto v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  2. United States v. SnellingUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1982
  3. United States v. HealyUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1988
  4. United States v. MamaluyUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1959
  5. United States v. TuallaCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2000

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. United States v. SmeadCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2009
  2. United States v. SmeadCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2009

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

Powered by the Exa API