United States v. Astor

18 C.M.A. 590, 18 USCMA 590, 40 C.M.R. 302, 1969 CMA LEXIS 716, 1969 WL 6092
CourtUnited States Court of Military Appeals
DecidedSeptember 19, 1969
DocketNo. 22,247
StatusPublished

This text of 18 C.M.A. 590 (United States v. Astor) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Court of Military Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Astor, 18 C.M.A. 590, 18 USCMA 590, 40 C.M.R. 302, 1969 CMA LEXIS 716, 1969 WL 6092 (cma 1969).

Opinion

Opinion of the Court

Darden, Judge:

The president’s inquiry into the prov-idency of accused’s plea of guilty to absence without leave, in violation of Article 86, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 USC § 886, does not include an itemizing of the essential elements of this offense. The procedure followed in this case would not meet the standard that must apply to cases tried thirty days after the decision in United States v Care, 18 USCMA 535, 40 CMR 247. However, Astor’s own statement that defense counsel had explained each element and his later acknowledgment in mitigation that he had been absent without leave because of foot problems satisfy us that his plea of guilty was provident.

Accordingly, the decision of the board of review is affirmed.

Chief Judge Quinn and Judge Ferguson concur.

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

Related

United States v. Care
18 C.M.A. 535 (United States Court of Military Appeals, 1969)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
18 C.M.A. 590, 18 USCMA 590, 40 C.M.R. 302, 1969 CMA LEXIS 716, 1969 WL 6092, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-astor-cma-1969.