9 C.M.A. 330 | United States Court of Military Appeals | 1958
Lead Opinion
Opinion of the Court
The facts in this case are similar to those in United States v Mickel, 9 USCMA 324, 26 CMR 104. For the reasons stated in that case, the decision of the board of review is reversed. The record of trial is returned to The Judge Advocate General of the Air Force for submission to the board of review for further proceedings in accordance with this opinion. See United States v Reynolds, 9 USCMA 328, 26 CMR 108.
Concurrence Opinion
(concurring in the result) :
I concur in the result.
In United States v Tomaszewski, 8 USCMA 266, 24 CMR 76, a majority of the Court reached the conclusion that an accused was entitled as a matter of right to have a certified lawyer appointed to represent him at an Article 32, investigation, and that is now the law. In the case at bar, the officer appointed was a graduate of a law school, a member of a recognized bar, and qualified in all respects except certification by The Judge Advocate General of the Air Force. While there was a lack of certification at the time of the pretrial hearing, there is no claim of specific prejudice, and the record shows the absence of harm to the accused. Therefore, I join in reversing the decision of the board of review.
