United States v. Nealy

70 M.J. 333, 2011 CAAF LEXIS 680
Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces·Decided August 15, 2011·No. No. 11-0615/AR·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

CCA 20100654. Review granted on the following issues:

I. APPELLANT WAS CHARGED WITH COMMUNICATING A THREAT UNDER ARTICLE 134, BUT WAS CONVICTED PURSUANT TO HIS PLEA OF USING PROVOKING SPEECH IN VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 117. IN LIGHT OF UNITED STATES v. JONES, 68 M.J. 465 (2010) CAN THE CONVICTION BE SUSTAINED?
II. WHETHER AN ARTICLE 134 CLAUSE 1 OR 2 SPECIFICATION THAT FAILS TO EXPRESSLY ALLEGE EITHER POTENTIAL TERMINAL ELEMENT STATES AN OFFENSE UNDER THE SUPREME COURT’S HOLDINGS IN UNITED STATES v. RESENDIZ-PONCE AND RUSSELL v. UNITED STATES, AND THIS COURT’S RECENT OPINIONS IN MEDINA, MILLER, AND JONES.

Briefs will be filed under Rule 25 on Issue I only.

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

United States v. Nealy, 70 M.J. 333, 2011 CAAF LEXIS 680 (Ark. 2011).

70 M.J. 333 (United States v. Nealy) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

United States v. Nealy
71 M.J. 73 (Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, 2012)