United States v. Brewer

17 C.M.A. 474, 17 USCMA 474, 38 C.M.R. 272, 1968 CMA LEXIS 291, 1968 WL 5388
CourtUnited States Court of Military Appeals
DecidedApril 5, 1968
DocketNo. 20,784
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 17 C.M.A. 474 (United States v. Brewer) 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. Brewer, 17 C.M.A. 474, 17 USCMA 474, 38 C.M.R. 272, 1968 CMA LEXIS 291, 1968 WL 5388 (cma 1968).

Opinions

Opinion of the Court

Kilday, Judge:

Appellant was arraigned before a general court-martial convened at Camp Pendleton, California, charged with four specifications of absence without leave, in violation of Article 86, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 USC § 886. He pleaded guilty and was found guilty as charged. He was sentenced to a bad-conduct discharge, total forfeitures, confinement at hard labor for two years, and reduction to the pay grade of E-1. The convening authority approved the sentence but [475]*475suspended the execution of all portions, except the reduction in grade, for a period of fifteen months, with provision for automatic remission. A board of review in the office of the Judge Advocate General of the Navy-affirmed the findings of guilty and only so much of the. sentence as provided for a bad-conduct discharge, confinement at hard labor for twelve months, total forfeitures, and reduction to the pay grade of E-1, with the entire sentence, except for the reduction in grade, suspended on probation for twelve months.

Of the several issues assigned by appellate defense counsel in his petition

for review in this case two were granted for this Court’s consideration. One involves the “en masse” arraignment process intended by the law officer to test the providence of Brewer’s guilty plea and those of others. The second concerns the law officer’s failure to give more than a mere reference to introductory instructions usually given when the court is convened. The cases of United States v Pratt, 17 USCMA 464, 38 CMR 262, and United States v Shafer, 17 USCMA 456, 38 CMR 254, show these deviations to be in error. There is no prejudice for the same reasons shown therein.

The decision of the board of review is affirmed.

Chief Judge Quinn concurs.

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

Related

United States v. Thompson
6 M.J. 989 (U.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review, 1979)
United States v. Curtis
17 C.M.A. 478 (United States Court of Military Appeals, 1968)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
17 C.M.A. 474, 17 USCMA 474, 38 C.M.R. 272, 1968 CMA LEXIS 291, 1968 WL 5388, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-brewer-cma-1968.