U.S. v. Hall, 34 M.J. 695 (A.C.M.R. 1991) decision set aside, 36 M.J. 80 (C.M.A. 1992)

This U.S. Army Court of Military Review decision affirmed Hall's convictions of sodomy, adultery, and wrongful videotaping of "adulterous acts." The court also affirmed his sentence including dismissal from service and forfeiture of $1000 pay per month for three months. The case arose from a videotape depicting two sexual encounters between Hall and two different women, which was later discovered by Hall's wife. Hall pleaded guilty to adultery and wrongful videotaping. He pleaded not guilty to the sodomy charge, denied that sodomy took place, and argued that the constitutional right of privacy extends to heterosexual, noncommercial, private sexual acts between consenting adults.

The court rejected Hall's claim that the statute criminalizing sodomy infringed upon his constitutional right to privacy, citing Hardwick v. Bowers as well as the book of Leviticus in the Bible in its finding that "sodomy, consensual or otherwise, is not constitutionally protected conduct within the military."