CreatorTitleDescriptionPublication NumberOrganizationPublication DateEffective DateExpiration DateUploaded On
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V SHULTZ (2023 WL 6140828)Appellant was tried by special court-martial composed of military judge alone. Pursuant to his pleas of guilty, entered in accordance with a pretrial agreement, Appellant was convicted of one specification of false official statement, in violation of Article 107, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), and one specification of extramarital sexual conduct, in violation of Article 134, UCMJ. The court sentenced Appellant to reduction to E-3 and a bad-conduct discharge. The convening authority suspended reduction in grade beyond reduction to E-5. Thereafter, judgment was entered. This specification is intended to allege what was formerly called adultery, that is, sexual intercourse between two persons, at least one of whom is married to someone else. However, it does not allege that either person was married. It is therefore an inadequate specification. United States v. King, 34 M.J. 95, 97 (C.M.A. 1992). Only so much of the sentence as provides for reduction to E-5 and a bad-conduct discharge is affirmed. We determine that the findings and sentence, as modified, are correct in law and fact and, on the basis of the entire record, should be approved. Accordingly, the findings of guilty and the sentence, as modified, are affirmed.Docket No. 1486Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals9/20/20239/20/20239/20/2023
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V MCCLARY - 68 MJ 606Appellant was tried by special court-martial composed of members. Pursuant to his pleas of guilty, entered in accordance with a pretrial agreement, Appellant was convicted of one specification of conspiracy to make a false official statement, in violation of Article 81, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); and six specifications of signing false official records and two specifications of making false official statements, in violation of Article 107, UCMJ. Contrary to his pleas, Appellant was also convicted of two specifications of assault and battery, in violation of Article 128, UCMJ. The panel sentenced Appellant to confinement for four months, reduction to E-1, and a bad-conduct discharge. The Convening Authority approved the sentence as adjudged.Docket No. 1312Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals1/19/20101/19/201010/30/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V LEE - 61 MJ 627Appellant was tried by general court-martial, military judge alone. Pursuant to pleas of guilty, entered in accordance with a pretrial agreement, Appellant was convicted of two specifications of attempted wrongful possession of 20 tablets of Hydrocodone, a Schedule III controlled substance, one specification of attempted wrongful possession of 17 tablets of paracetamol, a Schedule III controlled substance, one specification of attempted wrongful possession of 72 tablets of nurofen, a Schedule III controlled substance, one specification of wrongful introduction of 3.637 grams of psilocybin mushrooms, a Schedule I controlled substance, onto an installation under the control of the armed forces with intent to distribute, in violation of Article 80, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); four specifications of wrongful distribution of psilocybin mushrooms, a Schedule I controlled substance, one specification of wrongful manufacturing of psilocybin mushrooms, a Schedule I controlled substance, one specification of wrongful possession of alprozalam, a Schedule IV controlled substance, and one specification of wrongful introduction of psilocybin mushrooms, a Schedule I controlled substance, onto an installation under the control of the armed forces with the intent to distribute, in violation of Article 112a, UCMJ; two specifications of larceny, in violation of Article 121; and two specifications of forgery, in violation of Article 123, UCMJ.Docket No. 1200Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals6/1/20056/1/200510/24/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V ONTIVEROS - 59 MJ 639Appellant was tried by general court-martial, military judge alone. Pursuant to his pleas of guilty, entered in accordance with a pretrial agreement, he was found guilty of one specification of conspiracy to steal and wrongfully dispose of military property of the United States of a value greater than $100, in violation of Article 81, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); one specification of wrongful disposition of military property of the United States of a value greater than $100, in violation of Article 108, UCMJ; and one specification of larceny of military property of the United States of a value greater than $100, in violation of Article 121, UCMJ. The judge sentenced Appellant to a bad conduct discharge, confinement for six months, and reduction to E-3. The Convening Authority approved the adjudged sentence, which was within the sentence limits of the pretrial agreement.Docket No. 1178Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals11/25/200311/25/200310/5/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V Drews - Per CuriamAppellant was tried by general court-martial, military judge alone. Pursuant to his pleas of guilty, entered in accordance with a pretrial agreement, Appellant was found guilty of the following offenses: one specification of violating a lawful general order, in violation of Article 92 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); two specifications of sodomy with a child, in violation of Article 125, UCMJ; and one specification of wrongful solicitation to commit an indecent act, two specifications of an indecent act upon a child, and two specifications of indecent liberties with a child, in violation of Article 134, UCMJ. Appellant was sentenced to a bad conduct discharge, confinement for seven years, and reduction to pay grade E-1. The Convening Authority approved the sentence but, in accordance with the pretrial agreement, suspended execution of the confinement in excess of fifty-five months for a period of fifty-five months from the date the sentence was adjudged. Before this Court, without admitting that the findings and sentence are correct in law and fact, Appellant has submitted this case on its merits as to any and all errors. The Government, having examined the record, submits that the findings and sentence are correct in fact and law.Docket No. 1181Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals7/16/20037/16/200310/5/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V POINTEK PER CURIAMAppellant was tried by general court-martial, military judge alone. Pursuant to his pleas of guilty, entered in accordance with a pretrial agreement, Appellant was convicted of two specifications of violating a lawful general order by wrongfully using a government computer for other than authorized purposes and one specification of violating a lawful general order by wrongfully possessing drug paraphernalia, in violation of Article 92, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); and one specification of wrongfully and knowingly transporting child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(1), one specification of wrongfully and knowingly possessing child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(5)(B), and one specification of wrongfully providing alcoholic beverages to a person under the age of twenty-one, in violation of Article 134, UCMJ. The military judge sentenced Appellant to a dishonorable discharge and confinement for twenty-five months. The Convening Authority changed the dishonorable discharge to a bad-conduct discharge and approved the adjudged sentence as changed. He also suspended confinement in excess of fifteen months for the period of confinement plus twelve months from the date of Appellant’s release from confinement, as required by the pretrial agreement.Docket No. 1229Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals6/3/20056/3/200510/24/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V ARNOLD - UNPUBLISHEDAppellant was tried by general court-martial, military judge alone. Pursuant to his pleas of guilty, entered in accordance with a pretrial agreement, Appellant was convicted of two specifications of violating 18 U.S.C. 2251(a) by producing child pornography and one specification of wrongfully and knowingly possessing child pornography, all in violation of Article 134, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). The military judge sentenced Appellant to a bad-conduct discharge, confinement for seventy-eight months, and reduction to E-1. The Convening Authority approved the sentence as adjudged but suspended all confinement in excess of forty-eight months for twelve months from the date of the Convening Authority’s action, pursuant to the terms of the pretrial agreement.Docket No. 1257Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals9/19/20079/19/200710/30/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V WESTVEER - UNPUBLISHEDAppellant was tried by general court-martial, military judge alone. Pursuant to his pleas of guilty, entered in accordance with a pretrial agreement, Appellant was convicted of two specifications of failure to obey a general order and two specifications of dereliction of duty, in violation of Article 92, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); one specification of assault, in violation of Article 128, UCMJ; and one specification of attempting to receive child pornography, in violation of Article 134, UCMJ. The military judge sentenced Appellant to confinement for twelve months, reduction to E-3, and a bad-conduct discharge. The Convening Authority approved the sentence as adjudged. However, the Promulgating Order erroneously states that the sentence included forfeiture of all pay and allowances. We will order a correction.Docket No. 1305Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals10/27/200910/27/200910/30/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V HOLLAND - 68 MJ 576Appellant was tried by general court-martial, military judge alone. Pursuant to his pleas of guilty, entered in accordance with a pretrial agreement, Appellant was convicted of two specifications of distributing cocaine, in violation of Article 112a, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); and one specification each of indecent acts with a minor, indecent exposure, and wrongfully providing alcohol to minors, all in violation of Article 134, UCMJ. The military judge sentenced Appellant to confinement for fifteen months, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, reduction to E-1, and a bad-conduct discharge. The Convening Authority approved the sentence as adjudged. The pretrial agreement had no effect on the sentence.Docket No. 1301Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals12/8/200912/8/200910/30/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V BLAIR - 67 MJ 566Appellant was tried by general court-martial, military judge alone. Pursuant to his pleas of guilty, entered in accordance with a pretrial agreement, Appellant was convicted of three specifications of violating a lawful general order, in violation of Article 92, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); nine specifications of making a false official statement, in violation of Article 107, UCMJ; one specification of neglectful damage to military property, in violation of Article 108, UCMJ; and the following in violation of Article 134, UCMJ: one specification of wrongfully recruiting for, soliciting membership in, and promoting activities of the Ku Klux Klan while publicly displaying an affiliation with the Armed Services; one specification of violating Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 269 § 10(m) and 18 U.S.C. § 13 by wrongfully possessing a large capacity firearm; one specification of violating Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 269 § 10(h) and 18 U.S.C. § 13 by wrongfully possessing seven dangerous weapons; one specification of violating 26 U.S.C. §§ 5845(a), 5861(d), and 5871 by unlawfully knowingly receiving and possessing a firearm that is a destructive device (an explosive bomb); one specification of being drunk and disorderly; three specifications of wrongfully endeavoring to impede an investigation; and one specification of willfully and unlawfully altering a public record. The military judge sentenced Appellant to a bad-conduct discharge, confinement for one year, and reduction to E-3. The sentence was unaffected by the pretrial agreement, and the Convening Authority approved it as adjudged.Docket No. 1278Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals11/13/200811/13/200810/30/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V TURNER - PER CURIAMAppellant was tried by general court-martial, military judge alone. Pursuant to his pleas of guilty, entered in accordance with a pretrial agreement, Appellant was convicted of three specifications of indecent acts with a female under sixteen years of age, in violation of Article 134, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). Appellant was sentenced to a bad-conduct discharge, reduction to E-1, and confinement for one year. The Convening Authority approved the adjudged sentence, which was permitted under the terms of the pretrial agreement.Docket No. 1206Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals6/3/20046/3/200410/18/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V. CORREA (MERITS)Appellant was tried by general court-martial, military judge alone. Pursuant to his pleas of guilty, entered in accordance with a pretrial agreement, Appellant was convicted of three specifications of failing to obey a lawful order by wrongfully possessing drug paraphernalia in government housing, in violation of Article 92, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); two specifications of false official statements, in violation of Article 107, UCMJ; five specifications of distribution, possession with intent to distribute, introduction, and use of a controlled substance, in violation of Article 112a, UCMJ; and one specification of conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces, in violation of Article 134, UCMJ. The military judge sentenced Appellant to confinement for twelve months, reduction to E-1, and a bad-conduct discharge. The Convening Authority approved the sentence. The pretrial agreement did not affect the sentence.Docket No. 0368Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals5/15/20195/15/20195/21/2019
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V COKER - 67 MJ 571Appellant was tried by general court-martial, military judge alone. Pursuant to his pleas of guilty, entered in accordance with a pretrial agreement, Appellant was convicted of the following offenses: two specifications of attempt to commit indecent liberties with a child, in violation of Article 80, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); one specification of fraudulent appointment, in violation of Article 83, UCMJ; one specification of assault consummated by a battery against a child, in violation of Article 128, UCMJ; two specifications of conduct unbecoming an officer, in violation of Article 133, UCMJ; and four specifications of indecent acts or indecent liberties with a child, one specification of violating 18 U.S.C. § 2252A by receiving child pornography, and one specification of kidnapping, all in violation of Article 134, UCMJ. The military judge sentenced Appellant to dismissal from the Coast Guard, total forfeitures, and confinement for thirty years, against which he ordered credit for 132 days of pretrial confinement. The Convening Authority approved the sentence as adjudged, suspended the confinement in excess of twelve years until six months after Appellant is released from confinement, pursuant to the pretrial agreement, and applied 132 days of pretrial confinement credit against the approved confinement in accordance with United States v. Allen, 17 M.J. 126 (C.M.A. 1984).Docket No. 1280Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals11/21/200811/21/200810/30/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V SCHRADER 60 MJ 830Appellant was tried by general court-martial, military judge alone. Pursuant to his pleas of guilty, entered in accordance with a pretrial agreement, Appellant was convicted of the following offenses: two specifications of violating a lawful general regulation by wrongfully engaging in sexually intimate behavior with a female Third Class Petty Officer and a female Second Class Petty Officer at various locations at the U.S. Coast Guard Training Center Cape May, New Jersey, and two specifications of dereliction of duty by willfully failing to maintain a proper military relationship with a female Second Class Petty Officer and a female Seaman Apprentice, in violation of Article 92, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); one specification of maltreatment of a female Seaman, in violation of Article 93, UCMJ; and two specifications of wrongfully impeding an investigation into his alleged offenses, in violation of Article 134, UCMJ.Docket No. 1197Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals1/10/20051/10/200510/24/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V CONOVER - 61 MJ 681Appellant was tried by general court-martial, military judge alone. Pursuant to his pleas of guilty, entered in accordance with a pretrial agreement, Appellant was convicted of the following offenses: three specifications of wrongful use of marijuana, one specification of wrongful distribution of marijuana, one specification of wrongful use of cocaine, and one specification of wrongful distribution of Oxycontin, all in violation of Article 112a, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); three specifications of carnal knowledge in violation of Article 120, UCMJ; one specification of assaulting a petty officer in violation of Article 128, UCMJ; and one specification of violating 18 U.S.C. § 2423 by knowingly transporting a person under the age of eighteen from North Carolina to Virginia to engage in sexual activity, one specification of wrongfully and falsely altering a U.S. Armed Forces identification card, one specification of committing an indecent act on the body of a female under sixteen years of age, two specifications of breaking restriction, and two specifications of unlawfully entering the berthing room of a female seaman, all in violation of Article 134, UCMJ.Docket No. 1217Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals7/28/20057/28/200510/24/2017
Page 27 of 34

Oral Arguments


Pursuant to U.S. Department of Defense Standard carrying out Article 140a, Uniform Code of Military Justice [10 U.S.C. s. 940a] (revised, January 2025), an audio recording of an oral argument will typically be made publicly accessible. Audio recordings for oral arguments after the effective date of this new rule (January 2025) are below. As part of this requirement, a military service provides a mechanism by which a written transcript may be made available upon request. Contact HQS-DG-LST-CG-LMJ@uscg.mil with the reason for the request. 

 

Parties Docket Audio File Date
U.S. v. Ray 1498 MP3 2025/05/13
U.S. v. Kelley 1495 MP3 2025/03/26