Gnip v. Barrineau
Opinion of the Court
By this Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, petitioner seeks to challenge the jurisdiction of a special court-martial which convicted him of wrongful possession, transfer and sale of marijuana in violation of Navy regulations.
The petition further avers that following his conviction, the court-martial sentenced petitioner to confinement at hard labor for 3 months, partial forfeitures and reduction to grade E-l.
In United States v. Snyder, 18 USCMA 480, 40 CMR 192 (1969), we held that resort to the remedies available under 28 USC § 1651 may be had only
"in aid of the exercise of our jurisdiction over cases properly before us or which may come here eventually. Our jurisdiction to hear appeals, no matter how well-founded, is set out by Congress in Code, supra, Article 67.”
The sentence imposed in petitioner’s case is neither reviewable as a matter of right by a Court of Military Review under Article 66, Uniform Code, su
Accordingly, it is, by the Court, this 28th day of December 1973,
ORDERED:
That said petition be, and the same hereby is, dismissed.
Article 92, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 USC § 892.
In Rainville v. Lee, 22 USCMA 464, 47 CMR 554 (1973), we held that courts-martial have jurisdiction of such offenses, wherever committed. See also United States v. Beeker, 18 USCMA 563, 40 CMR 275 (1969). In the absence of an allegation that the person or persons to whom he transferred and sold the marijuana in question were civilians having no connection with the military establishment, we must assume the individuals were off-duty military personnel. Compare United States v. Morley 20 USCMA 179, 43 CMR 19 (1970).
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.