United States v. Manginell
United States Air Force Court of Military Review
32 M.J. 891 (1991)
- Written by Angela Patrick, JD
Facts
Airman First Class Steven Manginell (defendant) was assigned to guard a warehouse in Panama during a military operation involving hostile forces. Manginell stole a camera and four watches from the warehouse. At a court-martial, Manginell was charged with looting for stealing the watches and the camera. Manginell was also charged with larceny for stealing a United States vehicle-registration sticker. The looting charge carried a maximum sentence of life imprisonment, and the larceny charge carried a maximum sentence of five years of confinement. Manginell pleaded guilty to the charges and was sentenced to a bad-conduct discharge, six months of confinement, a reduction in rank, and the forfeiture of some wages for six months. On appeal, Manginell argued that his guilty plea to the looting charge was improvident and should be set aside because (1) the crime of looting required that the servicemember act with force or violence and (2) there was no evidence that Manginell had taken the camera or watches using force or violence. Three other airmen also stole property from areas that they were guarding in Panama during the same operation, but those three airmen were charged with larceny instead of looting.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)
Concurrence (Kastl, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.