Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

10 M.J. 317

Pearson v. Cox

United States Court of Military Appeals · decided 1981-03-23

Relies on United States v. Brownd

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1981-03-23

How this case has been cited

Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently August 2001

200198119902000decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

COOK, Judge

¶1(dissenting):

¶2I adhere to my view that the “sole discretion” vested in a convening authority in respect to an application for deferment of confinement of an adjudged sentence is not judicially reviewable for abuse. I would, therefore, dismiss the application for relief by this Court. See my separate opinion in United States v. Brownd, 6 M.J. 338, 341 (C.M.A.1979). In any event, I do not find any abuse of discretion in the denial of the request for deferment, irrespective of whether the staff judge advocate’s advice as to the legality of barring accused from the Enlisted Men’s Club for the duration of the deferment was correct or not. Consequently, I would deny the petition for extraordinary relief.

/10/mj/317 · .json · Public domain