United States v. James
United States v. James
71 M.J. 3; 2011 CAAF LEXIS 1060
Opinion of the Court
CCA 20081163. Review granted on the following issue:
WHETHER THE SPECIFICATION OF CHARGE II FAILS TO STATE AN OFFENSE BECAUSE IT DOES NOT ALLEGE, EXPRESSLY OR BY NECESSARY IMPLICATION, THE ‘TERMINAL ELEMENT' AS REQUIRED BY UNITED STATES v. FOSLER, 70 M.J. 225 (C.A.A.F. 2011).
The decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals is vacated. The record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Army 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
(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.