WEISSENBORN

v.

JONES ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• Schlesinger v. Councilman, 420 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1975)
  …3 (1969); Secretary of the Navy v. Avrech, supra. Cf. Warner v. Flemings, decided together with Gosa v. Mayden, 413 U. S. 665 (1973). See also In re Yamashita, 327 U. S. 1, 8 (1946); In re Vidal, 179 U. S. 126 (1900). Cf. Crawford v. United States, 380 U. S. 970 (1965) (motion for leave to file petition for writ of certiorari to Court of Military Appeals denied). Restatement of Judgments § 11 (1942); F. James, Civil Procedure § 11.5 (1965). Compare Ashe v. McNamara, 355 F. 2d 277 (CA1 1965), with Davies v.…
• O'Callahan v. Parker, 395 U.S. 258 (U.S. 1969)
  …the court-martial. In practice usually only senior enlisted personnel, i. e., [*264] noncommissioned officers, are selected. See United States v. Crawford, 15 U. S. C. M. A. 31, 35 C. M. R. 3, motion for leave to file petition for certiorari denied, 380 U. S. 970. See generally Schiesser, Trial by Peers: Enlisted Members on Courts-Martial, 15 Catholic ü. L. Rev. 171 (1966). At the time petitioner was tried, a general court-martial was presided over by a “law officer,” who was required to be a member of the…
• Gosa v. Mayden, 413 U.S. 665 (U.S. 1973)
  …348, 349-350, relief by way of habeas corpus is an exception to that finality clause. It was suggested by the Solicitor General in his brief in opposition to a motion for leave to file a petition for writ of certiorari in Crawford v. United States, 380 U. S. 970, that while the statutes made the judgment of the Court of Military Appeals “final and conclusive,” habeas corpus would be available to a person confined and a writ of error coram nobis in the District Court if he is not confined; citing 25 U. S. C.…