United States v. Courtney
This text of 70 M.J. 361 (United States v. Courtney) 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.
Opinions
CCA 37694. Review granted on the following issue:
WHETHER AN ARTICLE 134 CLAUSE 1 OR 2 SPECIFICATION THAT FAILS TO EXPRESSLY ALLEGE EITHER POTENTIAL TERMINAL ELEMENT STATES AN OFFENSE UNDER THE SUPREME COURT’S HOLDINGS IN UNITED STATES v. RESENDIZ-PONCE AND RUSSELL v. UNITED STATES, AND THIS COURT’S OPINION IN UNITED STATES v. FOSLER, 70 M.J. 225 (C.A.A.F. 2011).
The decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals is vacated. The record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Air Force for remand to that court for consideration of the granted issue in light of United States v. Fosler, 70 M.J. 225 (C.A.A.F. 2011). [See also ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW this date.]
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
70 M.J. 361, 2011 CAAF LEXIS 826, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-courtney-armfor-2011.