Opinion

United States v. Adams

  • 21 C.M.A. 401
  • 21 USCMA 401
  • 45 C.M.R. 175
  • 1972 CMA LEXIS 739
  • 1972 WL 14148
Court
United States Court of Military Appeals
Filed
May 19, 1972
Status
Published
Author
Duncan
On the bench
Darden, Duncan, Quinn
Cited by
15 cases
Authority
More cited than 12.4%

The opinion

Duncan, Judge

(dissenting):

My review of the record leads me to conclude that the Government has not shown by the evidence that it was impracticable to permit the accused to consult with counsel upon request. I see no reason why he could not have been afforded the opportunity to consult counsel at Subic Bay while ashore and confined from February 28 to March 4. Such a procedure deprived the accused of a fundamental and essential right, the denial of which offends a well-ordered system of justice. See my expressed view on the subject of the right to consult counsel as stated in United States v Mason, 21 USCMA 389 , 45 CMR 163 (1972). I would reverse the decision of the Court of Military Review.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.