United States v. Williams
This text of 15 C.M.A. 270 (United States v. Williams) 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
[271]*271Opinion of the Court
This case involves the validity of the same Office of Special Investigations directive involved in United States v Enloe, 15 USCMA 256, 35 CMR 228, United States v Beck, 15 USCMA 269, 35 CMR 241, and United States v Meyer, 15 USCMA 268, 35 CMR 240, the provisions of which were interposed prior to accused’s trial in order to prevent a private interview between its agents and defense counsel. For the reasons set forth in the cited cases, we find error present which is prejudicial to the substantial rights of the accused.
In light of our action, the motion by appellate defense counsel to file a brief regarding one of the issues relating to this question is denied.
The decision of the board of review is reversed, and the record of trial is returned to The Judge Advocate General of the Air Force. A rehearing may be ordered.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
15 C.M.A. 270, 15 USCMA 270, 35 C.M.R. 242, 1965 CMA LEXIS 233, 1965 WL 4658, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-williams-cma-1965.