United States v. Wilkins

United States Court of Military Appeals

United States v. Wilkins

22 C.M.A. 334

United States Court of Military Appeals·Decided June 8, 1973·No. No. 26,173; No. 26,516; No. 26,602; No. 26,775·Published

Opinion

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam:

We granted review in these cases to determine whether evidence of a previous conviction by special court-martial was properly admitted because the appellants were not represented at such special courts-martial by a professional lawyer. Chief Judge Dar-den and Judge Quinn, for the reasons set forth in their separate opinions in United States v Alderman, 22 USCMA 298, 46 CMR 298 (May 25, 1973), would hold that such evidence is admissible. Accordingly, the decision of the U. S. Army Court of Military Review in each of these cases is affirmed.

Judge Duncan dissents for the . reasons set forth in his separate opinion in United States v Henry, 22 USCMA 328, 46 CMR 328 (June 8, 1973).

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

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam:

We granted review in these cases to determine whether evidence of a previous conviction by special court-martial was properly admitted because the appellants were not represented at such special courts-martial by a professional lawyer. Chief Judge Dar-den and Judge Quinn, for the reasons set forth in their separate opinions in United States v Alderman, 22 USCMA 298, 46 CMR 298 (May 25, 1973), would hold that such evidence is admissible. Accordingly, the decision of the U. S. Army Court of Military Review in each of these cases is affirmed.

Judge Duncan dissents for the . reasons set forth in his separate opinion in United States v Henry, 22 USCMA 328, 46 CMR 328 (June 8, 1973).

United States v. Wilkins, 22 C.M.A. 334 (cma 1973).

Pincite

22 C.M.A. 334 (United States v. Wilkins) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.