Case Name: UNITED STATES, Appellee v. CHARLES PEARSON, Private, U. S. Army, Appellant
Court: United States Court of Military Appeals
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1967-08-11
Citations: 17 C.M.A. 204
Docket Number: No. 20,208
Parties: UNITED STATES, Appellee v CHARLES PEARSON, Private, U. S. Army, Appellant
Judges: 
Reporter: Decisions of the United States Court of Military Appeals
Volume: 17
Pages: 204–204

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES, Appellee v CHARLES PEARSON, Private, U. S. Army, Appellant
17 USCMA 204, 37 CMR 468
No. 20,208
August 11, 1967
Colonel Daniel T. Ghent, Major David J. Passamaneck, and Captain Gerald F. Rickman were on the pleadings for Appellant, Accused.
Lieutenant Colonel David Rarick and Captain Salvatore A. Romano were on the pleadings for Appellee, United States.

Opinion:
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM:
Two statements of the accused were received in evidence after proof that he was advised of his rights under Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 31, 10 USC § 831, and that he was entitled either to "legal assistance" from the staff judge advocate's office or to representation by civilian counsel at his own expense. The interrogating investigator did not inform the accused that a "military lawyer would be provided free of charge," nor did he tell him that counsel might be present during the interrogation. In short, the warning as to accused's counsel was wholly inadequate, and it was prejudicial error to receive the statements. United States v Tempia, 16 USCMA 629, 37 CMR 249; Miranda v Arizona, 384 US 436, 16 L ed 2d 694, 86 S Ct 1602 (1966).
The decision of the board of review is reversed, and the record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Army. A rehearing may be ordered, or the board may, pursuant to accused's plea, affirm findings of guilty of wrongful appropriation and reassess the sentence.