Bigrow v. Hiatt

Third Circuit

Bigrow v. Hiatt

168 F.2d 992, 1948 U.S. App. LEXIS 2166

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit·Decided July 2, 1948·No. No. 9563·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

A careful examination of the record in this case convinces us that the appellant, Bigrow, now a military prisoner in the United States Penitentiary, Lewisburg, Pennsylvania, received a fair trial by court-martial for unlawfully killing a brother soldier by shooting him in the neck with a sub-machine gun, a violation of Article of War 93, 10 U.S.C.A. § 1565, and for misbehavior before the enemy in that he was drunk on duty in the presence of the enemy, a violation of Article of War 75, 10 U.S.C.A. § 1547. The offenses occurred in the vicinity of Vannes, France, on or about August 9, 1944. In nowise was the appellant denied due process of law. See also the opinion of the court below, D.C., 70 F.Supp. 826. The order of the court below will be affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

A careful examination of the record in this case convinces us that the appellant, Bigrow, now a military prisoner in the United States Penitentiary, Lewisburg, Pennsylvania, received a fair trial by court-martial for unlawfully killing a brother soldier by shooting him in the neck with a sub-machine gun, a violation of Article of War 93, 10 U.S.C.A. § 1565, and for misbehavior before the enemy in that he was drunk on duty in the presence of the enemy, a violation of Article of War 75, 10 U.S.C.A. § 1547. The offenses occurred in the vicinity of Vannes, France, on or about August 9, 1944. In nowise was the appellant denied due process of law. See also the opinion of the court below, D.C., 70 F.Supp. 826. The order of the court below will be affirmed.

Bigrow v. Hiatt, 168 F.2d 992, 1948 U.S. App. LEXIS 2166 (3d Cir. 1948).

Pincite

168 F.2d 992 (Bigrow v. Hiatt) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related