United States v. Kiddo
United States Court of Military Appeals
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partWerner, Judge
I concur with the majority opinion as it relates to the findings, but dissent as to the sentence. The Court of Military Appeals *777has consistently held that where court members are importuned, as they were in this case, by argument of counsel to render a certain sentence in order to comply with command desires, policies or directives concerning military discipline, prejudicial error exists. United States v. Grady, 15 M.J. 275 (C.M.A.1983); United States v. Allen, 20 U.S.C.M.A. 317, 43 C.M.R. 157 (1971); United States v. Lackey, 8 U.S.C.M.A. 718, 25 C.M.R. 222 (1958); United States v. Davis, 8…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- United States v. FowleUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1956
- United States v. HawthorneUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1956
- United States v. GradyUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1983
- United States v. JohnsonUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1964
- United States v. EstradaUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1957
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.