10 U.S.C. § 864
DEFINITIONS AND OTHER GENERAL PROVISIONS.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 145
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1957–2024 · leading case: United States v. Nerad, 69 M.J. 138 (C.A.A.F. 2010).
United States v. Nerad, 69 M.J. 138 (C.A.A.F. 2010). “Article 64, of the Uniform Code, supra, 10 U.S.C. § 864 . Not only does Article 66, supra, require that a board affirm findings of guilt which it determines to be correct in law and fact, but also that such determination be made “on the basis of the entire record.”
United States v. Arness, 74 M.J. 441 (C.A.A.F. 2015). “See Article 64, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 864 (2012). The second provision affecting a CCA’s jurisdiction provides that it may also review: (1) any court-martial case which (A) is subject to action by the Judge Advocate General under this section [§ 869], and (B) is sent to the Court of…”
Bolton v. Dep't of the Navy Bd. for Corr. of Naval Records, 914 F.3d 401 (6th Cir. 2019). “64, 10 U.S.C. § 864 . The judge advocate must explain, in writing, whether the court-martial had jurisdiction over the accused, whether the charge stated an offense, and whether the sentence was legal.”
Noyd v. Bond, 395 U.S. 683 (1969). “The court-martial's judgment was then forwarded to General Bond for the review required by 10 U. S. C. § 864 , and on May 10, 1968, the General approved the sentence, ordering that: "Pending completion of appellate review, the accused will be confined in the United States…”
Robert E. Curry v. Sec'y of the Army, 595 F.2d 873 (D.C. Cir. 1979). “64, 10 U.S.C. § 864 (1976) which provides: In acting on the findings and sentence of a court-martial, the convening authority may approve only such findings of guilty, and the *875 sentence or such part or amount of the sentence, as he finds correct in law and fact and as he in…”
United States v. Weiss, 36 M.J. 224 (1992). “64, 50 USC § 651 , recodified in 10 USC § 864 (1956) (“[T]he convening authority shall approve only such findings of guilty, and the sentence or such part or amount of the sentence, as he finds correct in law and fact.”
Steele v. Van Riper, 50 M.J. 89 (C.A.A.F. 1999). “The Government also asserted that the findings could be approved after review by a judge advocate under Article 64, UCMJ, 10 USC § 864 (review of cases that have not been reviewed by a Court of Criminal Appeals under Article 66, UCMJ, 10 USC § 866 , or by the Judge Advocate…”
United States v. Suzuki, 14 M.J. 491 (1983). “Article 64, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 864 . Inasmuch as the sentence approved by the convening authority obviated the credit awarded by the military judge, no relief is required — regardless of the correctness of the judge’s rulings or the staff judge…”
United States v. Larner, 1 M.J. 371 (1976). “Johnson, supra; Articles 64 and 66, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. §§ 864 and 866; paragraph 88a, Manual for Courts-Martial, United States, 1969 (Rev.”
United States v. Matthews, 16 M.J. 354 (1983). “Under Article 64, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 864 , the convening authority has absolute discretion to disapprove this penalty.”
United States v. Diaz, 40 M.J. 335 (1994). “10 USC § 864 , 70A Stat. 58 (1956), instructed: In acting on the findings and sentence of a court-martial, the convening authority may approve only such findings of guilty, and the sentence or such part or amount of the sentence, as he finds correct in law and fact and as he in…”
United States v. Cansdale, 7 M.J. 143 (1979). “Article 64, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 864 . Also, every level of review is limited by the action of the lower level, Articles 65(b), 66(c), 67(d), UCMJ, 10 U.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.