United States v. Saxton

17 C.M.A. 355, 17 USCMA 355
CourtUnited States Court of Military Appeals
DecidedJanuary 26, 1968
DocketNo. 20,405
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 17 C.M.A. 355 (United States v. Saxton) 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.

Bluebook
United States v. Saxton, 17 C.M.A. 355, 17 USCMA 355 (cma 1968).

Opinions

Opinion of the Court

Quinn, Chief Judge:

A general court-martial convicted the accused of a number of offenses, in violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and sentenced him to a dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement at hard labor for twelve years. On review, intermediate appellate authorities modified some of the findings of guilty and mitigated the sentence to a bad-conduct discharge, total forfeitures, and confinement at hard labor for three years.

On this appeal, the accused contends that several of the separately alleged acts of misconduct were merely parts of a single transaction, and were not, therefore, separate for the purpose of punishment. The Government concedes that under the circumstances of the ease the offenses were not separate, with the result that the law officer erred in his instruction as to the maximum punishment for the offenses found. It asks that the case be remanded to the board of review for reassessment of the sentence in light of the error. See United States v Scott, 16 USCMA 478, 37 CMR 98; United States v Morse, 9 USCMA 799, 27 CMR 67; United States v Maynazarian, 12 USCMA 484, 31 CMR 70. In view of the concession, the decision of the board of review as to the sentence is reversed, and the record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy for resubmission to the board of review for reconsideration of the sentence. United States v Wagner, 8 USCMA 395, 24 CMR 205; United States v Hogan, 9 USCMA 365, 26 CMR 145; cf. United States v Smith, 11 USCMA 149, 28 CMR 373.

Judge Kilday concurs.

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

Related

United States v. Irving
1 M.J. 1188 (U S Air Force Court of Military Review, 1976)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
17 C.M.A. 355, 17 USCMA 355, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-saxton-cma-1968.