CreatorTitleDescriptionPublication NumberOrganizationPublication DateEffective DateExpiration DateUploaded On
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V CANWELL - UNPUBLISHEDUNITED STATES V CANWELL - UNPUBLISHED Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals - OpinionDocket No. 1351Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals6/20/20126/20/20129/18/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUnited States V CAMPBELL (UNPUBLISHED)United States V CAMPBELL (UNPUBLISHED) Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals DecisionDocket No. 1441Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals9/11/20179/11/20179/18/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V CAMPBELL - 55 MJ 591UNITED STATES V CAMPBELL - 55 MJ 591 - Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals DecisionDocket No. 1096Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals7/5/20017/5/20018/31/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V CALDWELL - UNPUBLISHEDUNITED STATES V CALDWELL - UNPUBLISHED - Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals OpinionDocket No. 1131Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals10/5/200010/5/20008/30/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V CABALLERO - 65 MJ 674Appellant was tried by special court-martial, military judge alone. Pursuant to his pleas of guilty, entered in accordance with a pretrial agreement, Appellant was convicted of one specification of unauthorized absence, in violation of Article 86, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); and one specification of making a false official statement, in violation of Article 107, UCMJ. The military judge sentenced Appellant to a bad-conduct discharge; confinement for 166 days, which amounted to the time served in pretrial confinement; and reduction to E-1. The sentence was unaffected by the pretrial agreement, and the Convening Authority approved it as adjudged.Docket No. 1252Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals7/12/20077/12/200710/30/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V BYRNE 70 MJ 611UNITED STATES V BYRNE 70 MJ 611 Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals - OpinionDocket No. 1334Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals 11/10/201111/10/20119/18/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V BUTLER - UNPUBLISHEDUNITED STATES V BUTLER - UNPUBLISHED Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsDocket No. 1404Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals3/9/20163/9/20169/1/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V BUSH - UNPUBLISHEDUNITED STATES V BUSH - UNPUBLISHED Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsDocket No. 1397Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals1/28/20171/28/20179/1/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V BURRIS - 59 MJ 700Appellant was tried by special court-martial, military judge alone. Pursuant to pleas of guilty, entered in accordance with a pretrial agreement, Appellant was convicted of the following offenses: one specification of attempted importation into the customs territory of the United States of 500 milligrams of Methandrostenolone, a Schedule III controlled substance, in violation of Article 80, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); one specification of dereliction of duty, in violation of Article 92, UCMJ; one specification of making a false official statement, in violation of the of Article 107, UCMJ; one specification of larceny in violation of Article 121, UCMJ; three specifications of making and uttering worthless checks in violation of Article 123a, UCMJ; and two specifications of dishonorable failure to pay debts, in violation of Article 134, UCMJ. The military judge sentenced Appellant to a bad-conduct discharge, confinement for 120 days, and reduction to E-1, which the Convening Authority approved, as permitted by the pretrial agreement.Docket No. 1180Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals1/16/20041/16/200410/18/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V BURKETT - 57 MJ 618UNITED STATES V BURKETT - 57 MJ 618 Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals OpinionDocket No. 1158Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals8/30/20028/30/20029/15/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V BURKE - UNPLUBLISHEDUNITED STATES V BURKE - UNPLUBLISHED Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals OpinionDocket No. 1431Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals 2/16/20172/16/20179/1/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V BUNGERT PER CURIAMAppellant was tried by special court-martial, military judge alone. Pursuant to his pleas of guilty, entered in accordance with a pretrial agreement, Appellant was convicted of one specification of attempting to wrongfully distribute methamphetamines, in violation of Article 80, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); one specification of dereliction of duty by using a government credit card for purposes unrelated to official government travel, in violation of Article 92, UCMJ; and two specifications of wrongfully using amphetamines and methamphetamines, and one specification of wrongfully distributing methamphetamines, in violation of Article 112a, UCMJ. The military judge sentenced Appellant to a bad-conduct discharge, confinement for 180 days, and reduction to E-1. The Convening Authority approved only so much of the adjudged sentence as provides for a bad-conduct discharge, confinement for 120 days and reduction to E-1, which was within the terms of the pretrial agreement. The Convening Authority also credited Appellant with 113 days of pretrial confinement pursuant to United States v. Allen, 17 M.J. 126 (C.M.A. 1984).Docket No. 1203Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals2/23/20052/23/200510/24/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V BULLA - 58 MJ 715Appellant was tried by special court-martial, military judge alone. Pursuant to her pleas of guilty, entered in accordance with a pretrial agreement, Appellant was found guilty of the following offenses: two specifications of unauthorized absence in violation of Article 86, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); one specification of wrongful use of cocaine, in violation of Article 112(a), UCMJ; and one specification of wrongful appropriation of military property in violation of Article 121, UCMJ. Appellant was sentenced to a bad conduct discharge (BCD), confinement for forty-nine days, reduction to paygrade E-1, and forfeiture of two-thirds pay for two months. With respect to the adjudged sentence, the pretrial agreement allowed approval of all elements, requiring only that the convening authority suspend the BCD for a period of twelve months from the date of the convening authority’s action. Additionally, however, the pretrial agreement included a misconduct provision that permitted the convening authority, among other things, to disregard the sentence limiting part of the pretrial agreement if the Appellant committed a violation of the UCMJ between the time the sentence was announced at her court-martial and the time the convening authority acted on the sentence.Docket No. 1171Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals5/16/20035/16/200310/5/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V BRZYSKI (MERITS)Appellant was tried by special court-martial, military judge alone. Pursuant to his pleas of guilty, entered in accordance with a plea agreement, Appellant was convicted of seven specifications of indecent recording, in violation of Article 120c, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). The court sentenced Appellant to a bad-conduct discharge, reduction to E-1, and confinement for ten months. The convening authority approved the sentence. Judgment was entered accordingly. 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. Decision We determine that the findings and sentence 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 approved below, are affirmed.Docket No. 1479Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals5/13/20225/13/20225/13/2022
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V BROWN (82 M.J. 702)A military judge sitting as a special court-martial convicted Appellant, contrary to his pleas, of three specifications of disrespect toward a petty officer and one specification of violation of a lawful general order prohibiting sexual harassment, in violation of Articles 91 and 92, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). The court sentenced Appellant to reduction to E-4, a reprimand, and restriction for thirty days. The convening authority approved the sentence. Judgment was entered accordingly. Approving Appellant’s timely application, the Judge Advocate General, U.S. Coast Guard, sent the case to this Court pursuant to Article 69(d), UCMJ. The findings of guilty to Specification 2 of Charge II and to Charge II are set aside. Specification 2 of Charge II and Charge II are dismissed with prejudice. Only so much of the sentence as provides for reduction to E-6, a reprimand, and restriction for thirty days is approved. The current reprimand, which references the sexual harassment conviction, is set aside. A revised reprimand shall be substituted. We determine that the remaining findings and the reassessed sentence are correct in law and, on the basis of the entire record, should be approved. Accordingly, the remaining findings of guilty and the sentence, as reassessed, are affirmed.Docket No. 001-69-21Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals6/6/20226/6/20226/8/2022
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