Court Opinion

ID: 9836611
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-02 03:14:30.715014+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:45:18.334537
License: Public Domain

CRAWFORD, Chief Judge
(dissenting):
I dissent because the majority treats Article 133 as a residual offense, that is, if an offense is charged and results in a conviction under another article, it may not be separately charged and result in a conviction under Article 133. Under a statutory elements test or a pleading elements test, Article 121 and Article 133 are not multiplicious. See United States v. Quiroz, 55 MJ 334 (2001)(Crawford, C.J., dissenting); see also Ball v. United States, 470 U.S. 856, 105 S.Ct. 1668, 84 L.Ed.2d 740 (1985).