| Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | UNITED STATES V SHERMOT 77 MJ 742 | A military judge sitting alone as a general court-martial convicted Appellant, contrary to his pleas, of one specification of sexual assault in violation of Article 120, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). The military judge sentenced Appellant to confinement for one year and dismissal, which the Convening Authority approved.
Appellant now asserts that: (1) the specification’s use of the disjunctive—that Appellant knew or reasonably should have known the complaining witness was incapable of consenting—rendered the verdict ambiguous and deprived Appellant of constitutional due process; and (2) the evidence is factually insufficient to sustain his conviction.
We disagree and affirm. | Docket No. 1447 | Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | 4/11/2018 | 4/11/2018 | | 4/16/2018 |
| Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | UNITED STATES V CLIFFT 77 MJ 712 | A general court-martial of members with enlisted representation convicted Appellant, contrary to his pleas, of one specification of false official statement in violation of Article 107, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); one specification of sexual assault in violation of Article 120, UCMJ; and two specifications of assault and battery in violation of Article 128, UCMJ. The members sentenced Appellant to confinement for four years, reduction to pay grade E-1, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and a dishonorable discharge. The Convening Authority approved the sentence as adjudged.
Appellant now asserts the following:
1. The record is incomplete and: (a) the trial counsel erred by attempting to complete an otherwise incomplete record; (b) the staff judge advocate failed to adequately address allegations in clemency matters of an incomplete record; and (c) because the record was incomplete, the convening authority erred by approving a sentence greater than that available at a special court-martial.
2. The military judge erred in his instructions regarding consent and trial defense counsel were ineffective for failing to ask for a correct instruction.
3. The military judge erred by permitting what amounted to a substantial variance between the charged offense and the verdict.1
4. The military judge erred by allowing “profiling evidence,” including uncharged misconduct.
5. The evidence of sexual assault is legally and factually insufficient.
6. The military judge erred by denying in-camera review of mental health records.
7. The military judge erred by denying a challenge for cause of one of the members. | Docket No. 1446 | Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | 3/12/2018 | 3/12/2018 | | 3/19/2018 |
| Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | UNITED STATES V FISHER 2018 W.L. 4267286 | Appellant was tried by general court-martial, military judge alone. Contrary to his pleas, Appellant was convicted of one specification of sexual assault, in violation of Article 120, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). The military judge sentenced Appellant to confinement for six months, reduction to E-1, and a bad-conduct discharge. At a post-trial Article 39(a), UCMJ, session, acknowledging the mandatory minimum sentence of a dishonorable discharge, the military judge sentenced Appellant to a dishonorable discharge, reduction to E-1, and confinement for ninety days. The Convening Authority approved the sentence as adjudged.
Before this court, Appellant has assigned the following errors:
I. The evidence is not factually and legally sufficient to support the finding of guilty to the sole specification.
II. Article 120(b)(3), UCMJ, is unconstitutionally vague because it fails to define what level of impairment renders a person incapable of consenting.
III. The military judge erred by excluding evidence pursuant to M.R.E. 412 when that evidence was constitutionally required.
After due consideration of the credibility of the evidence, we conclude that the evidence is legally sufficient, and we are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt of Appellant’s guilt. Accordingly, we summarily reject the first assignment. We discuss the other issues and affirm. | Docket No. 1444 | Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | 3/8/2018 | 3/8/2018 | | 3/19/2018 |
| Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | UNITED STATES V RUFF 2018 W.L. 4268537 | This is a Government appeal under Article 62, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). Appellee was charged with possession of child pornography, among other things. The alleged child pornography was found on Appellee’s mobile phone by a police officer who had arrested him for driving under the influence of alcohol. Appellee filed a motion to suppress the images found on his phone. On 28 November 2017, the military judge granted the suppression motion.
The Government gave notice of appeal of the ruling on 29 November 2017, and filed the record of trial with this Court on 21 December 2017. The Government filed its appeal brief on 10 January 2018. Appellee filed his brief on 30 January 2018.
The Government argues that the military judge erred in granting Appellee’s motion to suppress. We disagree and affirm the military judge’s ruling. | Docket No. 001-62-18 | Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | 2/15/2018 | 2/15/2018 | | 2/21/2018 |
| Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | UNITED STATES V SUMMERS (UNPUBLISHED) | Appellant was tried by special court-martial, military judge alone. Pursuant to his pleas, entered in accordance with a pretrial agreement, Appellant was convicted of one specification of indecent visual recording and one specification of distribution of an indecent visual recording, in violation of Article 120c, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). The military judge sentenced Appellant to reduction to E-1, confinement for six months, and a bad-conduct discharge. The Convening Authority approved the sentence as adjudged. The pretrial agreement did not affect the sentence.
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. | Docket No. 1449 | Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | 2/8/2018 | 2/8/2018 | | 2/12/2018 |
| Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | UNITED STATES V BAILEY (UNPUBLISHED) | Appellant was tried by general court-martial composed of members with enlisted representation. Contrary to his pleas, Appellant was convicted of three specifications of sexual assault and one specification of abusive sexual contact, all in violation of Article 120, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). The members sentenced Appellant to confinement for eighteen months, reduction to E-1, a dishonorable discharge, and forfeiture of all pay and allowances. The Convening Authority approved the sentence as adjudged.
This is our second review of this case. In our first review, we affirmed the findings and the sentence. The United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF) granted a petition for review and affirmed our decision as to findings but reversed as to sentence. United States v. Bailey, 71 M.J. 11, 16 (C.A.A.F. 2017). CAAF noted that although we had affirmed the sentence as approved—which included forfeiture of all pay and allowances—we failed to reference the forfeitures when reciting the sentence in our opening paragraph. CAAF concluded that our opinion was thus ambiguous and ordered the record remanded for clarification. Id. at 15–16.
Our omission of reference to forfeiture of pay and allowances was a scrivener's error. We now clarify by affirming the entire approved sentence, including forfeiture of all pay and allowances. | Docket No. 1428 | Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | 2/5/2018 | 2/5/2018 | | 2/6/2018 |
| Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | UNITED STATES V MATHEWS - UNPLISHED | Appellant was tried by special court-martial, military judge alone. Pursuant to his pleas, entered in accordance with a pretrial agreement, Appellant was convicted of one specification of willfully disobeying a superior commissioned officer, in violation of Article 90, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); one specification of assault and battery, in violation of Article 128, UCMJ; and one specification of obstructing justice, in violation of Article 134, UCMJ. The military judge sentenced Appellant to reduction to E-1, confinement for sixty days, and a bad-conduct discharge. The Convening Authority approved only so much of the sentence extending to reduction to E-1, confinement for forty-three days and a bad-conduct discharge and suspended the bad-conduct discharge, in accordance with the pretrial agreement. | Docket No. 1451 | Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | 12/11/2017 | 12/11/2017 | | 12/11/2017 |
| Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | UNITED STATES v. LEAL 76 M.J.862 | Appellant was tried by special court-martial, military judge alone. Contrary to his pleas, Appellant was convicted of one specification of abusive sexual contact, in violation of Article 120, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). The military judge sentenced Appellant to reduction to E-1, confinement for thirty days, and a bad-conduct discharge. The Convening Authority approved the sentence as adjudged. | Docket No. 1445 | Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | 10/19/2017 | 10/19/2017 | | 10/19/2017 |
| Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | United States V CAMPBELL (UNPUBLISHED) | United States V CAMPBELL (UNPUBLISHED)
Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals Decision | Docket No. 1441 | Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | 9/11/2017 | 9/11/2017 | | 9/18/2017 |
| Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | UNITED STATES V RAMOS ONREMAND - UNPUBLISHED | UNITED STATES V RAMOS ONREMAND - UNPUBLISHED
Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals Opinion | Docket No. 1418 | Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | 8/31/2017 | 8/31/2017 | | 9/1/2017 |
| Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | UNITED STATES V PARMLEY - UNPUBLISHED | UNITED STATES V PARMLEY - UNPUBLISHED
Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals Opinion | Docket No. 1443 | Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | 8/7/2017 | 8/7/2017 | | 9/1/2017 |
| Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | UNITED STATES V COTE - UNPUBLISHED | UNITED STATES V COTE - UNPUBLISHED
Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals Opinion | Docket No. 1442 | Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | 7/31/2017 | 7/31/2017 | | 9/1/2017 |
| Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | UNITED STATES V GREULICH - UNPUBLISHED | UNITED STATES V GREULICH - UNPUBLISHED
Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals Opinion | Docket No. 1437 | Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | 7/31/2017 | 7/31/2017 | | 9/1/2017 |
| Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | UNITED STATES V REESE ONREMAND - UNPUBLISHED | UNITED STATES V REESE ONREMAND - UNPUBLISHED
Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals Opinion | Docket No. 1422 | Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | 7/20/2017 | 7/20/2017 | | 9/1/2017 |
| Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | UNITED STATES V MCCOY II - UNPUBLISHED | UNITED STATES V MCCOY II - UNPUBLISHED
Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals Opinion | Docket No. 1438 | Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | 7/17/2017 | 7/17/2017 | | 9/1/2017 |