United States v. Bosley

17 C.M.A. 350, 17 USCMA 350, 38 C.M.R. 148, 1968 CMA LEXIS 339, 1968 WL 5353
CourtUnited States Court of Military Appeals
DecidedJanuary 12, 1968
DocketNo. 20,418
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 17 C.M.A. 350 (United States v. Bosley) 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. Bosley, 17 C.M.A. 350, 17 USCMA 350, 38 C.M.R. 148, 1968 CMA LEXIS 339, 1968 WL 5353 (cma 1968).

Opinion

Opinion of the Court

Quinn, Chief Judge:

To discredit certain aspects of the accused’s testimony, in which he denied breaking into the Main Post Exchange at the Marine Corps Air Station, Kaneohe Bay, Hawaii, and stealing a substantial amount of merchandise, the prosecution called as a rebuttal witness a Special Agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. He was allowed to testify about a statement made by the accused at the Provost Marshal’s Office during the investigation of the offenses.

Previous to the statement the accused was advised of his right to remain silent and the right to “talk with a lawyer,” but he was not informed he had a right to appointed counsel and to counsel’s presence during the interrogation. While the advice satisfied legal requirements for admissibility at the time the statement was obtained, the omissions were fatal to admission in evidence at the time of trial. United States v Tempia, 16 USCMA 629, 37 CMR 249; United States v Hardy, 17 USCMA 100, 37 CMR 364. It was, therefore, error to admit the Agent’s testimony.

In view of our conclusion as to the Agent’s testimony, we need not consider the other assignments of error which relate to the same offenses. The decision of the board of review as to the findings of guilty of Charges I and II, and their respective specifications, is reversed, and those findings of guilty and the sentence are set aside. The record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy for resubmission to the board of review. In its discretion, the board of review may reassess the sentence on the basis of the findings of guilty of Charge III, specifications 2 and 3, to which the accused pleaded guilty, or it may order a rehearing of Charges I and II and the sentence.

Judges FERGUSON and Kilday concur.

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

Related

United States v. Clark
22 C.M.A. 570 (United States Court of Military Appeals, 1973)
United States v. Bearchild
17 C.M.A. 598 (United States Court of Military Appeals, 1968)
United States v. Kuchinsky
17 C.M.A. 495 (United States Court of Military Appeals, 1968)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
17 C.M.A. 350, 17 USCMA 350, 38 C.M.R. 148, 1968 CMA LEXIS 339, 1968 WL 5353, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-bosley-cma-1968.