United States v. Traxler
United States Court of Military Appeals
39 M.J. 476 (1994)
- Written by Salina Kennedy, JD
Facts
After Technical Sergeant Chris E. Traxler (defendant) received orders to board an aircraft for deployment in connection with Operation Desert Shield/Desert Storm on December 15, 1990, Traxler informed his first sergeant that he would not make the flight because he did not plan to deploy. Three days prior to the flight, Traxler spoke to his commander, Captain Collins, about his plan to not participate in deployment. Collins, anticipating that Traxler might follow through on his decision not to deploy, drafted a written order directing Traxler to board the plane. On December 15, Traxler went to the flightline but refused to board the plane. Collins was informed of Traxler’s refusal and went to the flightline, took Traxler aside, read the written order to him, and had Traxler sign a receipt acknowledging that he understood the order. Traxler refused to board and missed the flight. Collins testified that his purpose for issuing the order was not punitive; instead, he issued the order to use his full rank and position to ensure that Traxler deployed. Traxler was convicted by general court-martial of missing movement of an aircraft through design and for willfully disobeying the command of his superior officer to board the aircraft. The United States Air Force Court of Military Review affirmed, and Traxler appealed, arguing that he had committed only one offense because he had a preexisting duty to board the plane and Collins merely ordered him to carry out his preexisting duty.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Wiss, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 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.