Ex Parte Timmons

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• accepting the Drafters’ Analysis for why this Court should not automatically apply confinement credit to a punitive discharge
• R.C.M. 305(k) equivalencies should govern application of credits for punishment imposed at earlier court-martial to address former-jeopardy concerns
• appellant not entitled to have punitive discharge set aside as credit for “relatively short” period of pretrial confinement where no post-trial confinement was adjudged; punitive discharge is “qualitatively different” from confinement
• appellant not entitled to have punitive discharge set aside as credit for “relatively short” period of pretrial confinement where no post- trial confinement was adjudged; punitive discharge is “qualitatively different” from confinement
• describing punitive discharges as “personnel- related punishments”
• describing punitive discharges as “personnel-related punishments”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).