United States v. Hohman

Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces

United States v. Hohman

70 M.J. 37, 2011 CAAF LEXIS 298

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces

DecidedMarch 31, 2011

DocketNo. 11-6004/MC

StatusPublished

This text of 70 M.J. 37 (United States v. Hohman) 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. Hohman, 70 M.J. 37, 2011 CAAF LEXIS 298 (Ark. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

CCA 201000563. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals on appeal by United States under Article 62, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 862, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the following issue:

WHETHER THE NMCCA ERRED IN FINDING GOOD CAUSE FOR THE SEVERANCE OF SGT HOHMAN’S ATTORNEY-CLIENT RELATIONSHIP WITH HIS DETAILED DEFENSE COUNSEL WHERE (1) THE COUNSEL REQUESTED TO STAY ON ACTIVE DUTY TO REPRESENT SGT HOHMAN, (2) THE GOVERNMENT REJECTED THAT REQUEST AND HAS NOT DEMONSTRATED THAT IT DID SO DUE TO TRULY EXTRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCES OR MILITARY EXIGENCY, AND (3) THE JUDGE DID NOT DISCUSS THE COUNSEL’S DEPARTURE WITH SGT HOHMAN UNTIL MONTHS AFTER THE SEVERANCE.

It is further ordered that the above-entitled action be called for hearing on the 18th day of May, 2011. This hearing will commence immediately following the hearing in United States v. Prince, No. 11-6003/AR.

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

CCA 201000563. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals on appeal by United States under Article 62, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 862, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the following issue:

WHETHER THE NMCCA ERRED IN FINDING GOOD CAUSE FOR THE SEVERANCE OF SGT HOHMAN’S ATTORNEY-CLIENT RELATIONSHIP WITH HIS DETAILED DEFENSE COUNSEL WHERE (1) THE COUNSEL REQUESTED TO STAY ON ACTIVE DUTY TO REPRESENT SGT HOHMAN, (2) THE GOVERNMENT REJECTED THAT REQUEST AND HAS NOT DEMONSTRATED THAT IT DID SO DUE TO TRULY EXTRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCES OR MILITARY EXIGENCY, AND (3) THE JUDGE DID NOT DISCUSS THE COUNSEL’S DEPARTURE WITH SGT HOHMAN UNTIL MONTHS AFTER THE SEVERANCE.

It is further ordered that the above-entitled action be called for hearing on the 18th day of May, 2011. This hearing will commence immediately following the hearing in United States v. Prince, No. 11-6003/AR.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

70 M.J. 37, 2011 CAAF LEXIS 298, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-hohman-armfor-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack