Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces· 1/20/2010

United States v. Lubasky

Citations

68 M.J. 260
2010 CAAF LEXIS 18
2010 WL 200029

How courts have described this case

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

holding that the authority to modify a charge through exceptions and substitutions under R.C.M. 918(a)(1) “is directed at the factfinder” and is distinct from the more limited authority of an appellate court to approve a lesser included offense under Article 59(b
explaining that findings by exceptions and substitutions could not be made on appeal under the law in place at the time
noting that “variance” and findings by exceptions and substitutions pursuant to R.C.M. 918 occur at trial, not the appellate level
indicating that our review is limited to the facts alleged in the specification and the findings of the panel, specifically considering whether any exceptions or substitutions had been made
noting use of a debit card can constitute larceny of money from the owner of the bank account
noting use of a debit card can constitute larceny of money from the owner of the bank account

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Ryan, Effron, Baker, Erdmann, Stucky

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

11 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

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.