Case: UNITED STATES, Appellee v. ELWARD L. HOLMAN, Specialist Four, U. S. Army, Appellant
Abbreviation: United States v. Holman
Decision Date: 1967-11-17
Docket Number: No. 20,451
Citation: 17 C.M.A. 291
Volume: 17
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 ELWARD L. HOLMAN, Specialist Four, U. S. Army, Appellant
Judges: ■Chief Judge Quinn and Judge Kil-DAY concur.
Pages: 291–291

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES, Appellee v ELWARD L. HOLMAN, Specialist Four, U. S. Army, Appellant
17 USCMA 291, 38 CMR 89
No. 20,451
November 17, 1967
Colonel Daniel T. Ghent, Captain John Kagel, and Captain Stephen Arinson were on the pleadings for Appellant, Accused.
Lieutenant Colonel David Rarick, Major John F. Webb, Jr., and Captain Gregory U. Evans were on the pleadings for Appellee, United States.

Opinion:
Opinion of the Court
FeRGuson, Judge:
In this case, as in United States v Wheeler, 17 USCMA 274, 38 CMR 72, this day decided, the law officer limited his instructions to the maximum pún-ishment imposable and the mechanics of voting. Though evidence in extenuation and mitigation was introduced and counsel made brief arguments on the sentence, no guideposts for deliberation thereon were furnished the court-martial. The accused received the maximum sentence.
Under our decision in Wheeler, supra, the law officer's failure to instruct the court-martial was erroneous and, in light of the circumstances including imposition of the maximum penalty, prej-udicially so. Curative measures are, therefore, necessitated.
The decision of the board of review is reversed and the record of trial returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Army. The board may reassess the sentence or order a rehearing thereon.
Chief Judge Quinn and Judge Kil-DAY concur.