Case ID: cma_22/html/0372-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam: Duncan, Judge", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES, Appellee v GEORGE R. LANGSTON, Jr., Airman First Class, U. S. Air Force, Appellant UNITED STATES, Appellee v RICHARD C. MORGAN, Seaman, U. S. Navy, Appellant UNITED STATES, Appellee v TIMOTHY W. MOSHER, Private First Class, U. S. Marine Corps, Appellant UNITED STATES, APPELLEE v WALTER E. FELIX, Private, U. S. Marine Corps, Appellant
    No. 26,667
    No. 26,669
    No. 26,724
    No. 26,798
    June 22, 1973
    On the pleadings for Appellants, Accused, were Colonel George M. Wilson (No. 26,667), Captain Philip F O’Neill (No. 26,667), Commander George W. Powell, JAGC, USN (No. 26,669), Lieutenant Stephen T Myking, JAGC, USNR (No. 26,724), and Captain T O. Tottenham, USMCR (No. 26,798).
    On the pleadings for Appellee, United States, were Colonel C. F. Bennett (No. 26,667), Lieutenant Colonel G. L. Bailey, USMC (Nos. 26,669, 26,724 and 26,798), and Lieutenant E. Alan Hechtkopf, JAGC, USN (No. 26,724).
   OPINION OF THE COURT

Per Curiam:

The question presented for review in each of these cases is whether evidence of a previous Article 15 disciplinary proceeding at which correctional custody was imposed was inadmissible because the accused was unrepresented by appointed counsel at the proceeding. In United States v Shamel, 22 USCMA —, — CMR — (June 22, 1973), decided this date, we sustained the admissibility of the evidence. Accordingly, the decision of the Court of Military Review in each case is affirmed.

Duncan, Judge

(dissenting):

I disagree with the decision in these cases for the reasons set forth in my separate opinion in United States v Shamel, 22 USCMA —, — CMR — (June 22, 1973).