United States v. MacDonald
73 M.J. 238, 2014 CAAF LEXIS 184
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces
DecidedFebruary 21, 2014
DocketNo. 14-0001/AR
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases
This text of 73 M.J. 238 (United States v. MacDonald) 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. MacDonald, 73 M.J. 238, 2014 CAAF LEXIS 184 (Ark. 2014).
Opinion
CCA 20091118. Review granted on the following issues:
I. WHETHER THE ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS ERRED IN DETERMINING THAT THE MILITARY JUDGE’S ERROR IN QUASHING A SUBPOENA ISSUED TO PFIZER, INC., TO PRODUCE RELEVANT AND NECESSARY DOCUMENTS REGARDING CLINICAL TRIALS, ADVERSE EVENT REPORTS, AND POST-MARKET SURVEILLANCE OF THE DRUG VARENICLINE WAS HARMLESS BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.
II. WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE ABUSED HIS DISCRETION IN DENYING A DEFENSE REQUESTED INSTRUCTION ON INVOLUNTARY INTOXICATION, AND ERRED IN FAILING TO INSTRUCT THE MEMBERS ON THE EFFECT OF INTOXICATION ON APPELLANT’S ABILITY TO FORM SPECIFIC INTENT AND PREMEDITATION.
Briefs will be filed under Rule 25.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
United States v. MacDonald
73 M.J. 426 (Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, 2014)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
73 M.J. 238, 2014 CAAF LEXIS 184, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-macdonald-armfor-2014.