Minnesota § 192A.363 REVIEW BY SENIOR FORCE JUDGE ADVOCATE

Minnesota Statutes

§ 192A.363 — REVIEW BY SENIOR FORCE JUDGE ADVOCATE

Minnesota § 192A.363

PartMILITARY AFFAIRS

Ch. 192AUNIFORM CODE OF MILITARY JUSTICE

This text of Minnesota § 192A.363 (REVIEW BY SENIOR FORCE JUDGE ADVOCATE) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Minnesota primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Minn. Stat. § 192A.363 (2026).

Text

Subdivision 1.Review of findings of guilt.

(a)A general and special court-martial case in which there has been a finding of guilty shall be reviewed by the senior force judge advocate, or a designee. The senior force judge advocate, or designee, may not review a case under this subdivision if that person has acted in the same case as an accuser, investigating officer, member of the court, military judge, or counsel or has otherwise acted on behalf of the prosecution or defense.

(b)The senior force judge advocate's review shall be in writing and shall contain the following:

(1)conclusions as to whether:

(i)the court had jurisdiction over the accused and the offense;

(ii)the charge and specification stated an offense; and

(iii)the sentence was within the limits prescribed as a matter

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

Subdivision 1.Review of findings of guilt.
(a) A general and special court-martial case in which there has been a finding of guilty shall be reviewed by the senior force judge advocate, or a designee. The senior force judge advocate, or designee, may not review a case under this subdivision if that person has acted in the same case as an accuser, investigating officer, member of the court, military judge, or counsel or has otherwise acted on behalf of the prosecution or defense.
(b) The senior force judge advocate's review shall be in writing and shall contain the following:
(1) conclusions as to whether:
(i) the court had jurisdiction over the accused and the offense;
(ii) the charge and specification stated an offense; and
(iii) the sentence was within the limits prescribed as a matter of law;
(2) a response to each allegation of error made in writing by the accused; and
(3) if the case is sent for action under subdivision 2, a recommendation as to the appropriate action to be taken and an opinion as to whether corrective action is required as a matter of law.

Subd. 2.Action by adjutant general; authorization.
The record of trial and related documents in each case reviewed under subdivision 1 shall be sent for action to the adjutant general if:
(1) the judge advocate who reviewed the case recommends corrective action;
(2) the sentence approved under section192A.343, subdivision 3, extends to dismissal, a bad-conduct or dishonorable discharge, or confinement for more than six months; or
(3) the action is otherwise required by regulations of the adjutant general.

Subd. 3.Adjutant general action.
(a) The adjutant general may:
(1) disapprove or approve the findings or sentence, in whole or in part;
(2) remit, commute, or suspend the sentence, in whole or in part;
(3) except where the evidence was insufficient at the trial to support the findings, order a rehearing on the findings, on the sentence, or on both; or
(4) dismiss the charges.
(b) If a rehearing is ordered but the convening authority finds a rehearing impracticable, the convening authority shall dismiss the charges.