United States Court of Appeals For The Armed Forces, 2011

United States v. Courtney

United States v. Courtney
United States Court of Appeals For The Armed Forces · Decided September 23, 2011 · Baker, Effron
70 M.J. 361; 2011 CAAF LEXIS 826
United States v. Courtney

Dissenting Opinion

EFFRON, Chief Judge

(dissenting): I dissent for the reasons stated in my dissenting opinion in Fosler. United States v. Fosler, 70 M.J. 225, 233-40 (C.A.A.F. 2011).

Opinion of the Court

CCA 37694. Review granted on the following issue:

WHETHER AN ARTICLE 134 CLAUSE 1 OR 2 SPECIFICATION THAT FAILS TO EXPRESSLY ALLEGE EITHER POTENTIAL TERMINAL ELEMENT STATES AN OFFENSE UNDER THE SUPREME COURT’S HOLDINGS IN UNITED STATES v. RESENDIZ-PONCE AND RUSSELL v. UNITED STATES, AND THIS COURT’S OPINION IN UNITED STATES v. FOSLER, 70 M.J. 225 (C.A.A.F. 2011).

The decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals is vacated. The record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Air Force for remand to that court for consideration of the granted issue in light of United States v. Fosler, 70 M.J. 225 (C.A.A.F. 2011). [See also ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW this date.]

Dissenting Opinion

BAKER, Judge

(dissenting): I dissent for the reasons stated in my dissenting opinion in Fosler. United States v. Fosler, 70 M.J. 225, 240-47 (C.A.A.F. 2011).

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.