Cases

SULLIVAN, Judge (concurring in part and dissenting in part): Appellant was tried by a military judge sitting alone as a special court-martial at Aschaffenburg, Federal Republic of Germany, on October 7, 1988. In accordance with his pleas, he was found guilty of one specification each of using marijuana and of distributing marijuana, in violation of Article 112a, Uniform Code of

SULLIVAN, Chief Judge (concurring): I find no plain error in this case. No objection was made at trial to the testimony of Major Mackey as violating RCM 1001(d), Manual for Courts-Martial, United States, 1984. If one had been lodged, the military judge would have been required to exercise his discretion concerning the rebuttal nature of this testimony. See United States v. Flynn, 28 MJ 21

SULLIVAN, Chief Judge (concurring): I have expressed my views on Issue I in United States v. Aurich, 31 MJ 95, 98 (CMA 1990) (Sullivan, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part). Nevertheless, accepting my Brothers’ conclusion of error, I agree it was harmless. Art. 59(a), Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 USC § 859(a).

SULLIVAN, Chief Judge (concurring in part and in the result): I find error occurred in the preparation of the recommendation in this case and join my Brother in ordering a new recommenda*454tion and action. As for the second granted issue, I find no legal error, so I do not find a rehearing on sentence is required. United States v. Aurich,

Opinion of the Court SULLIVAN, Chief Judge: During March and April 1989, appellant was tried by a special court-martial composed of enlisted members at Fort Benjamin Harrison, Indiana. Contrary to his pleas, he was found guilty of one specification of engaging in an improper senior/subordinate relationship and two specifications of adultery, in violation of Article 134, Uniform Code of Military Ju

EVERETT, Senior Judge (concurring in the result): The Coast Guard Court of Military Review concluded from its reading of United States v. Ohrt, 28 MJ 301 (CMA 1989), and United States v. Gunter, 29 MJ 140 (CMA 1989), that, “notwithstanding the apparent authority of RCM 1001(b)(5),” Manual for Courts-Martial, United States, 1984, “the government may not call an accused’s commanding officer

U.S. v. Armon IN THE CASE OF UNITED STATES, Appellee v. Derek C. ARMON, Staff Sergeant U.S. Army, Appellant No. 98-0388 Crim. App. No. 9601892 United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces Argued January 21, 1999 Decided July 21, 1999 GIERKE, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which COX, C.J., and SULLIVAN and CRAWFORD, JJ., joined. EFFRON, J., filed an opinion c

OPINION OF THE COURT STONE, Senior Judge: The military justice sentencing scheme operates within a narrow range of admissible evidence. Evidence that is logically relevant to the determination of an appropriate sentence is often excluded, reflecting the “systemic costs of having court members determine sentences” in an adversarial proceeding. United States v. Brogan, 33 M.J. 588, 592 (N.M.C.M.R.1991

Opinion of the Court COX, Judge: Contrary to his pleas, appellant was convicted by special court-martial of two specifications of willful disobedience of a non-commissioned officer and one specification each of unauthorized absence, willful damage to private property, and false swearing, violations of Articles 86, 91, 109, and 134, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 USC §§ 886, 891, 909 and 9

Opinion of the Court COX, Judge: Appellant was charged with being absent without leave for 141 days and unlawfully using cocaine, in violation of Articles 86 and 112a, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 USC §§ 886 and 912a, respectively. He was tried at Fort Hood, Texas, by a special court-martial with officer and enlisted members. At trial, the military judge ruled that the urina

Opinion of the Court EVERETT, Senior Judge: Pursuant to his pleas at a general court-martial, Senior Airman Pompey was convicted of a one-time use of cocaine1 and *267was sentenced by the court members to a bad-conduct discharge, confinement for 1 month, total forfeitures, and reduction to E-l. The convening auth

OPINION OF THE COURT LEONARD, Senior Judge: Is the Air Force Form 2030, Drug and Alcohol Abuse Certificate, an individual signs upon entry into the Air Force later *901admissible against him in a court-martial as sentencing evidence to show knowledge of the illegal nature of a drug and the consequences of illegal use? Under the circumstances of this c

ORDER ON CROSS MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT BETH BLOOM, District Judge. THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon the Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, ECF No. [35] (Plaintiffs “Motion”), filed by Plaintiff Monica Alboniga (“Plain*1323tiff’), individually and on behalf of her minor child, A.M., and the Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF N

OPINION OF THE COURT RUSSELL, Judge: A military judge sitting as a special court-martial convicted the appellant, pursuant to his pleas, of four specifications of larceny in violation of Article 121, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 921 *722(1988) [hereinafter UCMJ]. A panel composed of officer and enlisted members sentenced the appell

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER CATHERINE D. PERRY, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Petitioner Scott McLaughlin is currently on death row at the Potosi Correctional Center in Mineral Point, Missouri, for the murder of Beverly Guenther. Petitioner was convicted by a jury in St. Louis County of first-degree murder, forcible rape, and armed criminal action. The jury found him not guilty of a second count of armed criminal

Opinion of the Court LAMBERTH, District Judge:1 During January and February 1990, appellant was tried by a military judge sitting alone as a general court-martial at Bergstrom Air Force Base, Texas. Contrary to his pleas, he was found guilty of rape (2 specifications), robbery (2 specifications), sodomy, and aggravated assault, in violation of Articles 120, 122, 125, and 128, U

771 So.2d 751 (2000) Randall MARKS v. 84 LUMBER COMPANY. No. 00-00322-WCA. Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit. October 11, 2000. *753 Allen M. Babineaux, Lafayette, Hugh B. Exnicios, Jr., Exnicios Legal Center, Folsom, Fernand Louis Laudumiey, III, Howard, Laudumiey, Mann, New Orleans, Counsel for Randall Marks. L

OPINION OF THE COURT LEONARD, Senior Judge: Officer and enlisted court members convicted Technical Sergeant Norvell St. Romain of use of cocaine discovered by urinalysis. They sentenced him to a bad conduct discharge and reduction to E — 1; however, the convening authority commuted his bad conduct discharge to 12 months confinement. Appellant contends that the military judge erred by allowing, over defense o

Opinion of the Court SULLIVAN, Judge: On November 2 and 3, 1987, appellant was tried by a military judge sitting alone as a general court-martial at Naval Construction Battalion Center, Gulfport, Mississippi. Contrary to his pleas, he was found guilty of committing an indecent act on a 2-year-old child, in violation of Article 134, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 USC § 934.*

*229ON MANDATORY REVIEW Opinion of the Court GIERKE, Judge: 1. A general court-martial composed of officers convicted appellant, contrary to his pleas, of premeditated murder, felony murder, attempted murder, and robbery (5 specifications), in violation of Articles 118, 80, and 122, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 USC §