United States v. Lanford

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that the distinction in labeling CCA action as clemency rather than judicial action “matters little, so long as it is clearly understood ... [that the Boards of Review maintain] the power to treat an accused with less rigor than their authority permits”
• stating that the distinction in labeling CCA action as clemency rather than judicial action “matters little, so long as it is clearly understood . . . [that the Boards of Review maintain] the power to treat an accused with less rigor than their authority permits”
• suggesting that intermediate appellate courts may grant clemency
• suggesting that intermediate appellate courts may grant clemency
• “This [fact] was raised during testimony of one witness during the investigation under Article 32, but was never asserted during any testimony at trial, so it cannot be considered. [Citing Bethea,]”
• “This [fact] was raised during testimony of one witness during the investigation under Article 32, ..., but was never asserted during any testimony at trial, so it cannot be considered. [Citing Bethea.]”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).