Case Name: UNITED STATES, Appellee v. HAROLD J. LANDRUM, Private First Class, U. S. Army, Appellant
Court: United States Court of Military Appeals
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1969-05-29
Citations: 18 C.M.A. 375
Docket Number: No. 20,960
Parties: UNITED STATES, Appellee v HAROLD J. LANDRUM, Private First Class, U. S. Army, Appellant
Judges: Judge DARDEN did not participate in the decision in this case.
Reporter: Decisions of the United States Court of Military Appeals
Volume: 18
Pages: 375–376

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES, Appellee v HAROLD J. LANDRUM, Private First Class, U. S. Army, Appellant
18 USCMA 375, 40 CMR 87
No. 20,960
May 29, 1969
Colonel Daniel T. Ghent, Major John Wall Hanft, and Captain Karl J. TJebel were on the pleadings for Appellant, Accused.
Lieutenant Colonel David Rarick, Major Edwin P. Wasinger, and Captain David K. Fromme were on the pleadings for Appellee, United States.

Opinion:
Opinion
FERGUSON, Judge:
This ease is before us for the second time. See United States v Landrum, 17 USCMA 526, 38 CMR.324. In the mandate accompanying our previous opinion, reversing for error in the law officer's instructions, we directed the Judge Advocate General of the Army to take such action "as will cause the convening authority to order a rehearing, if such rehearing is practicable." (Emphasis supplied.) Thereafter, although the accused had originally been tried, in Germany on orders of the Commanding General of the Third Infantry Division, the Judge Advocate General directed the Commanding General, Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, to take action in accordance with our mandate and opinion.
The accused was retried at Fort Leavenworth and again convicted of the original charges. Appellate defense counsel allege that the court-martial convened at Fort Leavenworth was without jurisdiction to rehear this case since the original convening authority had not first been given the option of ordering a rehearing-or dismissing the charges.
We agree. Our holding in United States v Robbins, 18 USCMA 86, 39 CMR 86, is directly in point. For the reasons set forth in Robbins, the proceedings ' in this case were without authority and heneé a nullity.
The decision of the board of review is reversed. The record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Army. A rehearing may be ordered. ' ;