United States v. Paule
U S Air Force Court of Military Review
1Opinion of the Court
DECISION
2Per curiam
The issue of accused’s mental responsibility was raised at trial and decided adversely to him in accordance with proper instructions given by the military judge. It was discussed in the review of the staff judge advocate where he expressed the opinion that the court was properly instructed and that the evidence “is adequate to support the finding of the court that the accused was legally sane.” It is clear to us that by referencing the military judge’s instructions the staff judge advocate did not apply an erroneous standard, but determined that the sanity of the accused was…
3Cases cited6 opinions
- United States v. GoodeUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1975
- United States v. FieldsUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1958
- United States v. OakleyUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1960
- United States v. BostonU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1979
- United States v. KohlerU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1978
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
4Cited by1 opinion
- United States v. DonnellyU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1981