United States v. Perry
United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces
48 M.J. 197 (1998)
- Written by Salina Kennedy, JD
Facts
Ensign Brian R. Perry (defendant) attended the United States Naval Academy. In return for a free college education, Perry committed to five years of naval service after graduation. Perry graduated in 1993, and one year later, he was convicted by a general court-martial of attempted sodomy, conduct unbecoming an officer, and committing indecent acts. During sentencing, Perry asked the military judge to instruct the members of the panel that, due to the commitment he had made to the Naval Academy, a dismissal could make him liable for reimbursing the Naval Academy $80,000. In support of the requested instruction, Perry offered a memorandum from the comptroller of the Naval Academy computing the cost of education and stating that a graduate who failed to fulfill his service commitment may be liable to reimburse the government for the cost of his education. The military judge declined to give the instruction, reasoning that government recoupment of Perry’s educational expenses was a collateral consequence too remote to be relevant to the panel’s sentencing determination. Perry was sentenced to dismissal and other punishments. The Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed Perry’s sentence, and Perry appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Gierke, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 816,000 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.