Case ID: mj_1/html/0107-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "per CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES, Appellee, v. Jack K. SAVINA, Specialist Four, U. S. Army, Appellant.
    No. 29,912.
    U. S. Court of Military Appeals.
    May 23, 1975.
    
      Colonel Victor A. DeFiori, Major James Kucera, and Captain Barry J. Wendt were on the pleadings for Appellant, Accused.
    
      Major Steven M. Werner and Captain William A. Poore were on the pleadings for the Appellee, United States.
   OPINION OP THE COURT

per CURIAM:

The staff judge advocate’s post-trial review erroneously states that the accused’s company commander, Captain Nelson, testified “the accused was immature and less than truthful in most of his dealings.” In fact, Captain Nelson testified to that effect concerning one Private Uhrig, a witness in the case. As the accused denied committing the offense charged, a substantial issue of credibility existed on the record. The review is unacceptable, therefore, because it is “misleading on an important point.” United States v. Samuels, 22 U.S.C.M.A. 238, 239, 46 C.M.R. 238, 239 (1973); United States v. Cruse, 21 U.S.C.M.A. 286, 288, 45 C.M.R. 60, 62 (1972).

The decision of the United States Army Court of Military Review is reversed, and the record of trial is remanded to the Judge Advocate General of the Army, for return to another convening authority for a new post-trial review and action.