🚨🚨🚨
CAAF yesterday released an opinion in US v. Stanton. More analysis to come. "For reasons that we explain below, we conclude that the convening authority’s approval of Appellant’s request for a discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial was not a “pretrial agreement” within the meaning of the Rules for Courts Martial (R.C.M.). We further conclude that, although the convening authority made some other kind of agreement with Appellant, the convening authority did not expressly or implicitly promise to vacate the finding of guilt and dismiss the charge and specification."
1 Comment
Cynic
1/14/2021 08:31:45 pm
"We take no position in this opinion on whether convening authorities should or should not approve discharges in lieu of trial by court-martial when a case is remanded for resentencing. We are concerned, however, that such requests and approvals might again arrive at an appellate court, as it did in this case, without review first by a military judge and without any clear indication of how the administrative discharge paperwork became part of the record. Absent further guidance on these subjects by amendments to the UCMJ, the R.C.M., or applicable service regulations, the counsel on both sides may face uncertainty regarding such arrangements."
Reply
Your comment will be posted after it is approved.
Leave a Reply. |
Links
CAAF -Daily Journal -Current Term Opinions ACCA AFCCA CGCCA NMCCA Joint R. App. Pro. Global MJ Reform LOC Mil. Law Army Lawyer Resources Categories
All
Archives
April 2022
|