United States v. Oramas
United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals
2007 WL 7271934 (2005)
Facts
Steven R. Oramas (defendant), a permanent-party soldier who worked as a medical-care specialist, was responsible for treating Initial Entry Training (IET) soldiers at the aid station for his military base. Oramas flirted and made inappropriate, unsolicited advances toward three IET soldiers who sought medical treatment at the aid station. Each of the soldiers either ignored or rebuffed Oramas’s advances. Oramas was charged with violating Army Regulation (AR) 600-20, a general regulation prohibiting permanent-party personnel from engaging in nonprofessional relationships with Initial Entry Training (IET) soldiers. Oramas pleaded guilty to the charges, and the military judge conducted a providence inquiry during which Oramas admitted to making advances toward each of the IET soldiers and being rejected by each of them. The military judge accepted Oramas’s guilty pleas, the convening authority approved the findings, and the case was sent to the United States Army Criminal Court of Appeals for review pursuant to Article 66 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Schenck, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 711,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 44,600 briefs, keyed to 983 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.
