Swilley v. Low

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that the burden was on the appellant to show prejudice when the staff judge advocate improperly limited the pool of eligible court members because he thought the accused was an E-6, when he was an E-5
• stating that “where the convening authority’s motive is benign, systematic inclusion or exclusion may not be improper”
• concluding that the burden was on the appellant to show prejudice when the staff judge advocate improperly limited the pool of eligible court members because he thought the accused was an E-6, when he was an E-5
• finding that the appellant did not demonstrate prejudice from an administrative error that resulted in an improper limitation on the pool of potential members
• finding that “improper motive” is an element of court stacking, a form of actual unlawful command influence”
• allocating to the Appellant the burden “[w]here administrative mistakes occur in detailing court members”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).