United States v. Hughes
76 M.J. 70, 2017 CAAF LEXIS 147
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces
DecidedJanuary 25, 2017
DocketNo. 17-0091/AR
StatusPublished
This text of 76 M.J. 70 (United States v. Hughes) 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. Hughes, 76 M.J. 70, 2017 CAAF LEXIS 147 (Ark. 2017).
Opinion
CCA 20160022. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the following issue:
WHETHER JUDGES CELTNIEKS AND BURTON, JUDGES ON THE COURT OF MILITARY COMMISSION REVIEW, WERE STATUTORILY AUTHORIZED TO SIT ON THE ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS, AND EVEN IF THEY WERE STATUTORILY AUTHORIZED TO BE ASSIGNED TO THE ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS, WHETHER THEIR SERVICE ON BOTH COURTS VIOLATED THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE GIVEN THEIR NEWLY ATTAINED STATUS AS SUPERIOR OFFICERS.
No briefs will be filed under-Rule 25.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
76 M.J. 70, 2017 CAAF LEXIS 147, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-hughes-armfor-2017.