United States v. Cisneros
71 M.J. 10, 2011 CAAF LEXIS 1097
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces
DecidedDecember 21, 2011
DocketNo. 12-0106/AF
StatusPublished
This text of 71 M.J. 10 (United States v. Cisneros) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
United States v. Cisneros, 71 M.J. 10, 2011 CAAF LEXIS 1097 (Ark. 2011).
Opinion
CCA S31871. Review granted on the following issue:
WHERE A SPECIFICATION CHARGED UNDER ARTICLE 134, UCMJ, FAILS TO STATE AN OFFENSE UNDER UNITED STATES v. FOSLER, 70 M.J. 225 (C.A.A.F. 2011), BY NOT INCLUDING THE TERMINAL ELEMENTS FOR CLAUSE 1 OR 2, CAN AN ACCUSED PROVIDENTLY PLEAD GUILTY TO SUCH A SPECIFICATION WHERE HE FAILS TO OBJECT TO THE SPECIFICATION AT TRIAL, WHERE THE MILITARY JUDGE ADVISES THE ACCUSED OF THE TERMINAL ELEMENTS DURING THE PROVIDENCE INQUIRY, AND THE ACCUSED ADMITS TO ALL THE ELEMENTS?
Briefs will be filed under Rule 25.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
United States v. Fosler
70 M.J. 225 (Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, 2011)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
71 M.J. 10, 2011 CAAF LEXIS 1097, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-cisneros-armfor-2011.