United States v. Weaver

20 C.M.A. 58, 20 USCMA 58, 42 C.M.R. 250, 1970 CMA LEXIS 762, 1970 WL 7060
CourtUnited States Court of Military Appeals
DecidedAugust 21, 1970
DocketNo. 22,997
StatusPublished
Cited by15 cases

This text of 20 C.M.A. 58 (United States v. Weaver) 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. Weaver, 20 C.M.A. 58, 20 USCMA 58, 42 C.M.R. 250, 1970 CMA LEXIS 762, 1970 WL 7060 (cma 1970).

Opinions

Opinion of the Court

DARDEN, Judge:

The appellant entered a plea of guilty to several offenses, including escape from lawful confinement (Additional Charge II), offering violence to a commissioned officer (Additional Charge I), and assault upon a military policeman in the execution of his duties (Additional Charge IV). A stipulation of fact admitted into evidence shows that the three offenses were committed in a transaction motivated by a “single impulse” to escape confinement. They merge, therefore, for punishment purposes. United States v Pearson, 19 USCMA 379, 41 CMR 379 (1970). Because limiting instructions encompassing this requirement were not given by the military judge reassessment of the sentence is required.

During a lengthy guilty plea inquiry Weaver acknowledged that he had offered violence to his superior commissioned officer by “grabbing him about the neck.” A stipulation of fact introduced as Prosecution Exhibit 1 attributes to a fellow conspirator the accosting of the officer. Neither portrayal disavows the guilty plea, however. Contention that the plea of guilty to Additional Charge I is negated by the military judge’s failure to explain the law of principals to the appellant during the guilty plea inquiry is without substance. United States v Wimberly, 20 USCMA 50, 42 CMR 242 (1970).

Accordingly, the decision of the Court of Military Review as to sentence is reversed. The record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Army for submission to the Court of Military Review for reassessment of the sentence in light of this opinion.

Chief Judge Quinn concurs.

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

Related

United States v. McCoy
32 M.J. 906 (U S Air Force Court of Military Review, 1991)
United States v. Morrison
22 M.J. 743 (U.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review, 1986)
United States v. Ridgeway
19 M.J. 681 (U S Air Force Court of Military Review, 1984)
United States v. Gore
14 M.J. 945 (U.S. Army Court of Military Review, 1982)
United States v. Jefferson
14 M.J. 806 (U.S. Army Court of Military Review, 1982)
United States v. Chisholm
10 M.J. 795 (U S Air Force Court of Military Review, 1981)
United States v. Dearman
7 M.J. 713 (U.S. Army Court of Military Review, 1979)
United States v. Rose
6 M.J. 754 (U.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review, 1978)
United States v. Kinion
5 M.J. 924 (U.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review, 1978)
United States v. Mercier
5 M.J. 860 (U S Air Force Court of Military Review, 1978)
United States v. Harrison
4 M.J. 332 (United States Court of Military Appeals, 1978)
United States v. Coker
2 M.J. 304 (U S Air Force Court of Military Review, 1976)
United States v. Douglas
2 M.J. 470 (U.S. Army Court of Military Review, 1975)
United States v. Burney
21 C.M.A. 71 (United States Court of Military Appeals, 1971)
United States v. Stein
20 C.M.A. 518 (United States Court of Military Appeals, 1971)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
20 C.M.A. 58, 20 USCMA 58, 42 C.M.R. 250, 1970 CMA LEXIS 762, 1970 WL 7060, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-weaver-cma-1970.