United States v. Romero
This text of 18 C.M.A. 578 (United States v. Romero) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Court of Military Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinions
Opinion of the Court
The accused pleaded guilty and was found guilty of larceny, in violation of Article 121, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 USC § 921. The providence of his plea is now under attack.
The procedure followed by the president of this special court-martial would not meet the standard that must apply to cases tried thirty days after the decision in United States v Care, 18 USCMA 535, 40 CMR 247. His inquiry, however, is comparable to that found in Care. The president determined that defense counsel had explained each element of the offense charged to the accused but nowhere did he itemize for the accused each element. Considering the inquiry made and the crime charged, we are satisfied that Romero’s plea is knowing and provident.
The decision of the board of review is, therefore, affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
18 C.M.A. 578, 18 USCMA 578, 40 C.M.R. 290, 1969 CMA LEXIS 703, 1969 WL 6079, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-romero-cma-1969.