United States v. Morrison

I concur in the majority’s conclusions that there are no statements in this review that present incorrect advice to the convening authority on the standard for evaluating the voluntariness of the accused’s pretrial statement,1 or cause that officer to draw impermissible inferences from an assertion by this accused of his constitutional rights.2 Hence, this case, unlike United States v. Martinez, 1 M.J. 280 (1976), does not require reversal; that decision I feel makes it clear *410that the waiver doctrine expressed in Goode3 is inapplicable in such an instance. The all-too-frequent scenario…