History
  • No items yet
midpage
United States v. Saplala
19 C.M.A. 344
United States Court of Militar...
1970
Check Treatment

Opinion of the Court

Darden, Judge:

After pleading guilty to assault with a dangerous weapon, the appellant testified in mitigation that he acted in self-defense. This inconsistency causes his plea of guilty to the assault with a dangerous weapon charge to be improvident. Consequently, we must set aside the plea to that charge. United States v Messenger, 2 USCMA 21, 6 CMR 21 (1952) ; United States v Walter, 16 USCMA 30, 36 CMR 186 (1966); United States v Baker, 17 USCMA 346, 38 CMR 144 (1967); United States v Vaughn, 17 USCMA 520, 38 CMR 318 (1968).

The decision of the Court of Military Review is reversed. The record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy. A rehearing may be ordered, or the sentence may be reassessed on the remaining charge.

Chief Judge Quinn and Judge Ferguson concur.

Case Details

Case Name: United States v. Saplala
Court Name: United States Court of Military Appeals
Date Published: Mar 20, 1970
Citation: 19 C.M.A. 344
Docket Number: No. 22,709
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.