United States v. Cooley
74 M.J. 269
Opinion
CCA 1389. Notice is hereby given that a certificate for review of the decision of the United States Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals was filed under Rule 22 on this date on the following issues:
WHETHER THE COAST GUARD COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS ERRED BY FINDING THAT PRE-TRIAL CONFINEMENT CAN SERVE AS PER SE PREJUDICE FOR PURPOSES OF DETERMINING A VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 10, UNIFORM CODE OF MILITARY JUSTICE.
WHETHER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF APPELLEE’S CASE, CONSIDERING THE FACTORS SET OUT IN BARKER V. WINGO, 407 U.S. 514, 530 (1972) AND APPLIED TO REVIEW OF ARTICLE 10 BY UNITED STATES V. BIRGE, 52 M.J. 209, 212 (C.A.A.F. 1999), [270] AMOUNT TO A VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 10, UNIFORM CODE OF MILITARY JUSTICE.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
United States v. Cooley, 74 M.J. 269 (Ark. 2015).
74 M.J. 269 (United States v. Cooley) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Barker v. Wingo
407 U.S. 514 (Supreme Court, 1972)
United States v. Birge
52 M.J. 209 (Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, 1999)