History
  • No items yet
midpage
United States v. Mainard
19 C.M.A. 488
United States Court of Militar...
1970
Check Treatment

Lead Opinion

Opinion of the Court

Darden, Judge:

Evidence of Article 15 punishment was introduced after the court found the appellant guilty of robbery and assault with a deadly weapon committed on June 23, 1969. For the reasons stated in United States v Johnson, 19 USCMA 464, 42 CMR 66 (1970), this was error. The nature of the inadmissible evidence, the seriousness of the offenses charged, and a comparison of the punishment resulting with the maximum that could have been imposed convince us that the military judge was uninfluenced by the Article 15 punishment in sentencing Mainard. Accordingly, we affirm the decision of the Court of Military Review.

Chief Judge Quinn concurs.





Dissenting Opinion

Ferguson, Judge

(dissenting) :

I dissent for the reasons set forth in my separate opinion in United States v Johnson, 19 USCMA 464, 42 CMR 66 (1970).

Case Details

Case Name: United States v. Mainard
Court Name: United States Court of Military Appeals
Date Published: Jun 5, 1970
Citation: 19 C.M.A. 488
Docket Number: No. 22,887
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.