United States v. Ragels

73 M.J. 204, 2014 CAAF LEXIS 75
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces
DecidedJanuary 23, 2014
DocketNo. 14-0070/AR
StatusPublished

This text of 73 M.J. 204 (United States v. Ragels) 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. Ragels, 73 M.J. 204, 2014 CAAF LEXIS 75 (Ark. 2014).

Opinion

CCA 20110955. Review granted on the following issue:

WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE ABUSED HIS DISCRETION IN ACCEPTING APPELLANT’S GUILTY PLEA AS TO THE CLAUSE THREE, ARTICLE 134, UCMJ, OFFENSE CHARGED IN SPECIFICATION 1 OF THE CHARGE WHEN APPELLANT WAS NOT ON NOTICE OF THE THEORY OF LIABILITY.

The decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals is reversed as to the words and figures “under 18 U.S.C. § 2252A,” in Specification 1 of the Charge, but is affirmed in all other respects. The finding of guilty as to those words and figures is set aside and that portion of Specification 1 is dismissed. [See also ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW this date.]

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

Related

§ 2252A
18 U.S.C. § 2252A

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
73 M.J. 204, 2014 CAAF LEXIS 75, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-ragels-armfor-2014.