United States v. Dues

19 C.M.A. 130, 19 USCMA 130, 41 C.M.R. 130, 1969 CMA LEXIS 619, 1969 WL 6309
United States Court of Military Appeals·Decided December 12, 1969·No. No. 22,463·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

Opinion of the Court

PER Curiam:

In this case, as in United States v Johnson, 18 USCMA 436, 40 CMR 148; United States v Newton, 18 USCMA 562, 40 CMR 274; and United States v Conner, 19 USCMA 74, 41 CMR 74, the president erred to the substantial prejudice of the accused in his instructions on sentence, when he failed to tell the court that, when voting on proposed sentences, it should begin with the lightest proposal and continue in this manner until a sentence is adopted by the concurrence of the required number of members. A rehearing on sentence is required.

The decision of the board of review is reversed. The record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy. A rehearing on sentence may be ordered.

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

United States v. Dues, 19 C.M.A. 130, 19 USCMA 130, 41 C.M.R. 130, 1969 CMA LEXIS 619, 1969 WL 6309 (cma 1969).

19 C.M.A. 130 (United States v. Dues) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

United States v. Fisher
21 M.J. 327 (United States Court of Military Appeals, 1986)
United States v. Roman
22 C.M.A. 78 (United States Court of Military Appeals, 1972)
United States v. Pierce
19 C.M.A. 225 (United States Court of Military Appeals, 1970)
United States v. Hoff
19 C.M.A. 246 (United States Court of Military Appeals, 1970)
United States v. McDowell
19 C.M.A. 151 (United States Court of Military Appeals, 1969)