United States v. Murphy

16 C.M.A. 245, 16 USCMA 245, 36 C.M.R. 401, 1966 CMA LEXIS 256, 1966 WL 4493
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in United States v. Murphy. Read the opinion of the Court — 14 C.M.A. 535
United States Court of Military Appeals·Decided April 29, 1966·No. No. 19,199·Published

Opinion

Opinion of the Court

Quinn, Chief Judge:

At issue in this ease is the authority of Head, Military Personnel Department, U. S. Naval Station, Treasure Island, San Francisco, California, to convene the special court-martial whieh tried the accused. Except for the location of the Naval Station, the jurisdictional facts are the same as those in United States v Surtasky, 16 USCMA 241, 36 CMR 397. For the reasons set out in our opinion in that case, we hold that the convening authority was competent to convene the court-martial which tried the accused. Accordingly, the decision of the board of review is affirmed.

Judges Ferguson and Kilday concur.

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

United States v. Murphy, 16 C.M.A. 245, 16 USCMA 245, 36 C.M.R. 401, 1966 CMA LEXIS 256, 1966 WL 4493 (cma 1966).

16 C.M.A. 245 (United States v. Murphy) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

United States v. Surtasky
16 C.M.A. 241 (United States Court of Military Appeals, 1966)