CreatorTitleDescriptionPublication NumberOrganizationPublication DateEffective DateExpiration DateUploaded On
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V BENNETT 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 the following offenses: two specifications of wrongfully using marijuana, two specifications of wrongfully using cocaine, and one specification of wrongfully distributing cocaine, in violation of Article 112a, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). The military judge sentenced Appellant to a bad-conduct discharge, confinement for 150 days, and reduction to E-1. The Convening Authority approved the sentence as adjudged, but suspended confinement in excess of ninety days for twelve months. The pretrial agreement had no effect on the sentence.Docket No. 1238Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals8/17/20058/17/200510/24/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V HUBBERT - 61 MJ 705Pursuant to Article 66(b), Uniform Code of Military Justice, the record of trial in this case was forwarded to this Court for review on 23 June 2005 and no assignments of errors or briefs have been filed. However, Appellant’s counsel has moved for this Court to abate the proceedings in this case ab initio based on the death of Appellant by his own hand, as reflected in Appendix A, which counsel has moved to attach. Appendix A is an email to Counsel for Appellant forwarding a Personnel Casualty Report message, date-time group 151844Z AUG 05 from COMCOGARD SECTOR SAULT STE MARIE MI, indicating that Appellant, while on active duty appellate leave, was pronounced dead on 15 August 2005, as a result of a self-inflicted gunshot wound. On consideration of counsel’s Motion for Abatement of Proceedings and Motion to Attach Document, filed under the Court’s Rules of Practice and Procedure, with no opposition from the Government, it is, by the Court, this 25th day of August, 2005,DOCKET NO. 1240Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals8/25/20058/25/200510/24/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V SUPAPO - 61 MJ 718Appellant was tried by special court-martial, military judge alone. Pursuant to his pleas of guilty, entered in accordance with a pretrial agreement, he was convicted of one specification of assault consummated by a battery by unlawfully striking another Third Class Petty Officer “on the back of the head with his hand, in the face with his closed fist, and in the stomach with his knee,” in violation of Article 128, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); and one specification of disorderly conduct the same date by “slapping, pushing, punching, and chasing” the same Petty Officer around the mess deck of their Coast Guard cutter, in violation of Article 134, UCMJ. The judge sentenced Appellant to a bad-conduct discharge, confinement for thirty days, and reduction to E-3. The Convening Authority approved the sentence as adjudged and credited Appellant with thirty days of pretrial confinement pursuant to United States v. Allen, 17 M.J. 126 (C.M.A. 1984).Docket No. 1210Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals8/30/20058/30/200510/24/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V THIBODEAU 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 knowingly receiving child pornography, one specification of knowingly transporting child pornography in interstate commerce, and one specification of knowingly possessing child pornography on land owned by the U.S. Government, all in violation of 18 U.S.C. 2252A, under Article 134, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). The military judge sentenced Appellant to a bad-conduct discharge, confinement for 210 days, and reduction to E-1.Docket No. 1215Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals9/9/20059/9/200510/24/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V MILLER - 61 MJ 827Appellant was tried by special court-martial military judge alone on 21 November 2003. After conviction of various drug offenses pursuant to pleas of guilty, entered in accordance with a pretrial agreement, Appellant was sentenced by the judge to a bad-conduct discharge and reduction to E-1, which the Convening Authority approved on 18 June 2004.DOCKET NO. 005-69-01Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals10/19/200510/19/200510/24/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V RIVERA - 62 MJ 564Appellant was tried by a general court-martial composed of officer and enlisted members. Despite his pleas of not guilty, he was convicted of one specification of attempted forcible sodomy on a child under the age of twelve years in violation of Article 80, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); one specification of forcible sodomy on a child under the age of twelve years in violation of Article 125, UCMJ; and three specifications of taking indecent liberties with a female under sixteen years of age, and one specification of committing an indecent act upon a female under sixteen years of age in violation of Article 134, UCMJ. The members sentenced Appellant to a bad-conduct discharge, confinement for three years, and reduction to E-1. The Convening Authority changed the adjudged reduction from E-1 to E-4 and approved the sentence as changed. Before this Court, Appellant has assigned eight errors, three of which were orally argued.Docket No. 1216Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals11/1/200511/1/200510/24/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V SHEEHAN - 62 MJ 568Appellant 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 wrongfully using cocaine on divers occasions, one specification of introduction of some amount of marijuana onto an installation used by the armed forces on divers occasions, one specification of wrongfully possessing some amount of marijuana on divers occasions, and one specification of wrongfully use marijuana on divers occasions, all in violation of Article 112a, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). The military judge sentenced Appellant to a bad-conduct discharge, confinement for five months, and reduction to E-1. The Convening Authority approved the sentence as adjudged, but, in accordance with the pretrial agreement, suspended confinement in excess of 120 days for the period of twelve months from the date the sentence was adjudged.Docket No. 1218Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals11/1/200511/1/200510/24/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V MCMILLEN 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 violating a lawful general order by wrongfully bringing an unauthorized firearm onto a federal facility, in violation of Article 92, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); one specification of willfully damaging military property of the United States, by damaging the Coast Guard sign at the entrance to his unit’s moorings in violation of Article 108, UCMJ; one specification of willfully and wrongfully damaging a vehicle, the property of Commanding Officer, USCGC MACKINAW (WAGB 83), by firing bullets into the door and tire in violation of Article 109, UCMJ; and one specification of drunk and disorderly conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces, in violation of Article 134, UCMJ. The military judge sentenced Appellant to a bad-conduct discharge, confinement for six months, forfeiture of $500 pay per month for six months, and reduction to E-1.Docket No. 1219Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals11/4/200511/4/200510/24/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V PETERSON 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 the following offenses: six specifications of unauthorized absence, in violation of Article 86, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); one specification of wrongful use of methamphetamine, a controlled substance, in violation of Article 112a, UCMJ; and one specification of larceny of property of a value of about nine dollars, in violation of Article 121, UCMJ. The military judge sentenced Appellant to a bad-conduct discharge, confinement for seventy-five days, and reduction to E-1. The Convening Authority approved the sentence as adjudged, but suspended confinement in excess of sixty days for the period of confinement plus twelve months from the date of Appellant’s release from confinement, which met the terms of the pretrial agreement. The Convening Authority noted that Appellant had spent forty-six days in pretrial confinement, and that his sentence would be credited accordingly.Docket No. 1244Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals11/8/200511/8/200510/24/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V LECOMTE - 63 MJ 501Appellant 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 one specification of violating a general order by using Coast Guard office equipment to view, download, and store sexually explicit materials, in violation of Article 92, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); and one specification of knowingly receiving material containing child pornography that had been transported in interstate commerce by computer, one specification of knowingly transporting child pornography in interstate commerce by computer, and one specification of knowingly possessing computer disks containing images of child pornography that had been transported in interstate commerce by computer, all in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252A, under Article 134, UCMJ. The military judge sentenced Appellant to confinement for four years and reduction to E-4. The Convening Authority approved the sentence as adjudged, but, as required by the pretrial agreement, suspended all confinement in excess of twelve months for twelve months from the date of the accused’s release from confinement. In approving the sentence as adjudged, the Convening Authority also included in his action the following unwarranted language: “…and except for that part of the sentence extending to a bad conduct discharge will be executed.” That additional language was not included in the promulgating order’s account of the Convening Authority’s action.Docket No. 1221Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals11/16/200511/16/200510/24/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V MOHAMMAD 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 twelve specifications of larceny, in violation of Article 121, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). The military judge sentenced Appellant to a bad-conduct discharge, confinement for 120 days, and reduction to E-1. The Convening Authority approved the sentence as adjudged, but suspended confinement in excess of sixty days for a period of twelve months from the date the sentence was announced, which results in a shorter confinement period than required by the terms of the pretrial agreement.Docket No. 1223Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals11/18/200511/18/200510/24/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V WELDIN 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 one specification of violating Article 134, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), by knowingly possessing visual depictions of minors engaged in sexually explicit conduct on computer disks that had been transported in interstate or foreign commerce, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252A. The military judge sentenced Appellant to a bad-conduct discharge, confinement for twelve months, and reduction to E-5. The Convening Authority approved the sentence as adjudged, but suspended the part of the sentence extending to a bad conduct discharge until the accused retires from active service, at which time, unless the suspension is sooner vacated, the suspended part of the sentence will be remitted without further action.Docket No. 1245Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals12/22/200512/22/200510/24/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V HUGHES - 62 MJ 621Appellant 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 one specification of violating 18 U.S.C. § 2252A by knowingly possessing child pornography that had been transported in interstate or foreign commerce, in violation of Article 134, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). The military judge sentenced Appellant to a bad-conduct discharge, a reduction to the rate of E-1, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for eight months. The Convening Authority approved the sentence as adjudged. The pretrial agreement had no effect on the sentence.Docket No. 1205Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals12/30/200512/30/200510/24/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V QUEVEDO 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 the following offenses: two specifications of failure to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty and one specification of unauthorized absence from his place of duty for one day, in violation of Article 86, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); one specification of failure to obey a lawful order from a second class petty officer to report to the clinic for an evaluation, in violation of Article 92, UCMJ; and one specification of assault on a female seaman by unlawfully placing his hand down the front of her pants, in violation of Article 128, UCMJ. The military judge sentenced Appellant to a bad-conduct discharge, confinement for ninety days, and reduction to E-2. The Convening Authority approved the sentence as adjudged. The pretrial agreement had no effect on the sentence.Docket No. 1224Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals1/10/20061/10/200610/24/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V ROTHIG 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 the following offenses: one specification of attempting to wrongfully distribute four designer amphetamine “ecstasy” pills, in violation of Article 80, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); one specification of wrongfully using designer amphetamine “ecstasy” pills and one specification of wrongfully introducing four designer amphetamine “ecstasy” pills onto a military installation, in violation of Article 112a, UCMJ; and one specification of wrongfully soliciting a seaman to introduce four designer amphetamine “ecstasy” pills onto a military installation, in violation of Article 134, UCMJ. The military judge sentenced Appellant to a bad conduct discharge, forfeiture of $800 per month for ten months, reduction to E-1, and confinement for ten months, which he credited with forty-four days of pretrial confinement pursuant to United States v. Allen, 17 M.J. 126 (C.M.A. 1984). The Convening Authority approved the sentence as adjudged and suspended confinement in excess of seven months pursuant to the terms of the pretrial agreement.Docket No. 1249Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals1/23/20061/23/200610/24/2017
Page 13 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