Case: UNITED STATES, Appellee v. DANNY L. MURPHY, Seaman Apprentice, U. S. Navy, Appellant
Abbreviation: United States v. Murphy
Decision Date: 1966-04-29
Docket Number: No. 19,199
Citation: 16 C.M.A. 245
Volume: 16
Reporter: Decisions of the United States Court of Military Appeals
Court: United States Court of Military Appeals
Jurisdiction: United States
Parties: UNITED STATES, Appellee v DANNY L. MURPHY, Seaman Apprentice, U. S. Navy, Appellant
Judges: Judges Ferguson and Kilday concur.
Pages: 245–246

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES, Appellee v DANNY L. MURPHY, Seaman Apprentice, U. S. Navy, Appellant
16 USCMA 245, 36 CMR 401
No. 19,199
April 29, 1966
Major Ernest B, Wright, USMC, argued the cause for Appellant, Ac- cased. Captain John P. Gleeson, USN, was on the pleadings for Appellant, Accused.
Commander Walter F. Brown, USN, argued the cause for Appellee, United States. Colonel J. E. Eanthorn, USMC, and Lieutenant Jean E. Van Slate, USNR, were on the pleadings for Appellee, United States.

Opinion:
Opinion of the Court
Quinn, Chief Judge:
At issue in this ease is the authority of Head, Military Personnel Department, U. S. Naval Station, Treasure Island, San Francisco, California, to convene the special court-martial whieh tried the accused. Except for the location of the Naval Station, the jurisdictional facts are the same as those in United States v Surtasky, 16 USCMA 241, 36 CMR 397. For the reasons set out in our opinion in that case, we hold that the convening authority was competent to convene the court-martial which tried the accused. Accordingly, the decision of the board of review is affirmed.
Judges Ferguson and Kilday concur.