United States v. Lonsford
71 M.J. 332, 2012 CAAF LEXIS 629
This text of 71 M.J. 332 (United States v. Lonsford) 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. Lonsford, 71 M.J. 332, 2012 CAAF LEXIS 629 (Ark. 2012).
Opinion
CCA 201100022. Review granted on the following issue:
APPELLANT CONTESTED SPECIFICATIONS 1 AND 2 OF CHARGE II, WHICH ALLEGED THAT HE WRONGFULLY COMMITTED ADULTERY UNDER ARTICLE 134, UCMJ, BUT DID NOT ALLEGE THE TERMINAL ELEMENT. ALTHOUGH THE LOWER COURT INITIALLY HELD THAT THE SPECIFICATIONS FAILED TO STATE AN OFFENSE AND SET ASIDE THE CONVICTIONS, IT SUBSEQUENTLY VACATED THAT DECISION AND AFFIRMED APPELLANT’S CONVICTIONS. DO SPECIFICATIONS 1 AND 2 OF CHARGE II STATE AN OFFENSE?
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)
71 M.J. 332, 2012 CAAF LEXIS 629, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-lonsford-armfor-2012.