United States v. Battle

20 M.J. 827, 1985 CMR LEXIS 3542
CourtU.S. Army Court of Military Review
DecidedJune 24, 1985
DocketSPCM 21225
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 20 M.J. 827 (United States v. Battle) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Army Court of Military Review primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Battle, 20 M.J. 827, 1985 CMR LEXIS 3542 (usarmymilrev 1985).

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

PER CURIAM:

Pursuant to his pleas, the appellant was convicted by a military judge sitting as a special court-martial of violating USFK [828]*828Regulation 27-5, Legal Services: Individual Conduct (25 Oct. 1983) [hereinafter cited as USFK Reg. 27-5], and USFK Regulation 60-1, Exchange Service: Ration Control (1 Sept. 1982) [hereinafter cited as USFK Reg. 60-1], by wrongfully transferring goods and by failing to show proper disposition of duty free goods, in violation of Article 92, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 892 (1982). He was sentenced to forfeiture of $300 pay per month for two months, confinement for two months, a bad-conduct discharge, and reduction to the grade of E-l. The convening authority approved the sentence.

On appeal, the appellant contends that his sentence is excessive and that the accountability required by USFK Reg. 27-5 and USFK Reg. 60-1 violates his fifth amendment right against self-incrimination. We find both of these assertions to be without merit. In so concluding,1 we have made the following factual determinations: the United States Army sends military forces into the sovereign nation of the Republic of Korea for mutually beneficial reasons of national security; the appellant was a noncommissioned officer on active duty in the United States Army and stationed in the Republic of Korea at the time of his offenses; the import and export of goods to and from the Republic of Korea by members of the United States Armed Forces are matters of political concern between the Republic of Korea and the United States of America; the SOFA contains vital agreements concerning sensitive customs matters and identifies certain related rights and obligations attending members of our Armed Forces who are stationed in the Republic of Korea; and, USFK Reg. 27-5 is designed, in part, to prohibit conduct by members of our force which would violate the spirit and scope of the SOFA, particularly with respect to customs control. In light of these findings, we find both the appellant’s prosecution for regulatory violations and his sentence appropriate.

The findings of guilty and the sentence are affirmed.

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

Related

United States v. Hilton
29 M.J. 1036 (U S Air Force Court of Military Review, 1990)
United States v. Barber
27 M.J. 885 (U.S. Army Court of Military Review, 1989)
United States v. Hilton
27 M.J. 323 (United States Court of Military Appeals, 1989)
United States v. Williams
27 M.J. 710 (U.S. Army Court of Military Review, 1988)
United States v. Jones
26 M.J. 632 (U S Air Force Court of Military Review, 1988)
United States v. Holman
23 M.J. 565 (U.S. Army Court of Military Review, 1986)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
20 M.J. 827, 1985 CMR LEXIS 3542, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-battle-usarmymilrev-1985.