United States v. Hardy
This text of 74 M.J. 265 (United States v. Hardy) 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.
Opinion
CCA 20120816. On consideration of the granted issue, the judgment of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals, United States v. Hardy, No. 20120816 (A. Ct. Crim. App. Aug. 13, 2014), and the judgment of this Court in United States v. Phillips, No. 14-0199/AR (C.A.A.F. Jan. 6, 2015), we conclude that Appellant is not entitled to have his guilty plea to disobeying the order of his superior commissioned officer under Article 90, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 890 (2012), set aside. Appellant did not establish “a substantial basis in law or fact for questioning his guilty plea.” United States v. Inabinette, 66 M.J. 320, 322 (C.A.A.F. 2008). He failed to produce evidence that the superior commissioned officer issued the restriction order for the sole purpose of increasing [266]*266the penalty that would apply if Appellant violated the restriction order. Therefore, it is ordered that the judgment of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals is hereby affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
74 M.J. 265, 2015 CAAF LEXIS 198, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-hardy-armfor-2015.