Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces· 6/15/2012

United States v. Humphries

Citations

71 M.J. 209
2012 CAAF LEXIS 691
2012 WL 2326074

How courts have described this case

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

noting that each case in which an element was not alleged “must be reviewed for harmless error to determine whether the constitutional error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt”
finding that “[n]either the specification nor the record provides notice of which terminal element or theory of criminality the Government pursued in this case”
finding that “[n]either the specification nor the record provides notice of which terminal element or theory of criminality the Government pursued in this case”
finding that “[n]either the specification nor the record provides notice of which terminal element or theory of criminality the Government pursued in this case”
finding that “[n]either the specification nor the record provides notice of which terminal element or theory of criminality the Government pursued in this case”
finding that “[n]either the specification nor the record provides notice of which terminal 2 KNOWLAND—ARMY 20071405 element or theory of criminality the Government pursued in this case”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Ryan, Erdmann, Ef-Fron, Baker, Stucky

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

92 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

62 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named United States v. Humphries

13 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.