United States v. Bartlett
United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces
66 M.J. 426 (2008)
- Written by Salina Kennedy, JD
Facts
Lieutenant Colonel David P. Bartlett, Jr. (defendant) pleaded guilty to unpremeditated murder. Prior to trial, the staff judge advocate advised the general-court-martial convening authority that, pursuant to Army Regulation (AR) 27-10, medical personnel, chaplains, veterinarians, and inspectors general were prohibited from serving on general-court-martial panels. Eleven officers within the convening authority’s command were otherwise eligible to serve as members of Bartlett’s court-martial, but the convening authority excluded them because they fell into the prohibited categories. Despite the exclusions, the panel selected by the convening authority was well-balanced. At trial, Bartlett moved for a new court-martial panel, arguing that the Secretary of the Army had exceeded his authority by promulgating AR 27-10 and that the military judge had erred by limiting the court-martial panel pursuant to the regulation. The military judge denied the motion, and the panel sentenced Bartlett to a dismissal and to twenty-five years’ confinement. The United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed, and Bartlett appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Stucky, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 804,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.