United States v. O'Connor

16 C.M.A. 126, 16 USCMA 126, 36 C.M.R. 282, 1966 CMA LEXIS 299, 1966 WL 4458

Opinions

Opinion of the Court

Quinn, Chief Judge:

This case involves the same lecture by the Staff Judge Advocate, Fort Devens, Massachusetts, to officers of the command, as was before us in United States v Albert, 16 USCMA 111, 36 CMR 267. At trial, defense counsel ex^ pressly declined to voir dire the court members who indicated they had attended the lecture. However, he moved for a change of venue on the ground the lecture “might lead them to adjudge sentences greater than they might otherwise have adjudged.” The motion was denied.

Our discussion in the Albert case of the substance of the lecture sustains the law officer’s ruling. Accordingly, the decision of the board of review is affirmed.

Judge Kilday concurs.