United States v. Finster
Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces
1DissentCrawford, Judge
I dissent because I disagree with the majority’s analysis of whether the error prejudiced a substantial right of appellee. Based on the charged offenses, there is no likelihood that the error affected his substantial rights. United States v. Powell, 49 MJ 460 (1998); see also United States v. Johnson-Saunders, 48 MJ 74, 75-76 (1998) (Crawford, J., dissenting); United States v. Edwards, 45 MJ 114, 117-18 (1996) (Crawford, J., dissenting). This is not a case where we should presume prejudice. To say that any reasonable convening authority might suspend or set aside the discharge or reduce…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- United States v. HastingSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- United States v. PowellCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 1998
- United States v. GriffinUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1957
- United States v. CookCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 1997
- United States v. ReistCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 1999
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.