| Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | LT UPHAM V CAPT J W ROLPH - ORDER | Petitioner, who is undergoing trial by a general court-martial composed of members, has
filed a petition for extraordinary relief styled as a request for relief in the nature of a writ of
mandamus. He seeks an emergency order staying proceedings in his trial until this Court rules
on the substantive issues raised in his petition for a writ of mandamus requiring the military
judge to properly instruct the members with respect to the offense of assault by means likely to
result in death or grievous bodily injury and to allow Petitioner to withdraw from a stipulation of
fact. Petitioner also moves this Court to have appellate counsel appointed to represent him. In a
separate filing, Petitioner moves this Court to attach documents to his petition for extraordinary
relief that constitute instructions to the members issued by the military judge. It is, by the Court,
this 8th day of December 2004, | MISC. DOCKET N0. 001-05 | Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | 12/8/2004 | 12/8/2004 | | 10/18/2017 |
| Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | UNITED STATES V ABDUL-RAHMAN - 59 MJ 924 | 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 the following offenses: four specifications of failure to obey a lawful general order by engaging in sexually explicit behavior with four different females on board USCGC RUSH, and one specification of violating a lawful general order by wrongfully possessing alcohol aboard USCGC RUSH, in violation of Article 92, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); one specification of sodomy with a female third class cadet, in violation of Article 125, UCMJ; one specification of unlawfully entering a female berthing area with the intent to commit a criminal offense, in violation of Article 130, UCMJ; and two specifications of indecent acts with another, in violation of Article 134, UCMJ. The judge sentenced Appellant to a bad-conduct discharge and confinement for 180 days, which was approved by the Convening Authority, unaffected by the pretrial agreement. | Docket No. 1192 | Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | 5/14/2004 | 5/14/2004 | | 10/18/2017 |
| 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 LEE - 61 MJ 627 | Appellant 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. 1200 | Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | 6/1/2005 | 6/1/2005 | | 10/24/2017 |
| Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | UNITED STATES V LONGWELL PER CURIAM | Appellant 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 two specifications of making false official statements, in violation of Article 107, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); and one specification of assault consummated by a battery, in violation of Article 128, UCMJ. The military judge sentenced Appellant to a bad-conduct discharge and confinement for 150 days. The Convening Authority approved the sentence as adjudged. The pretrial agreement had no effect on the sentence. | Docket No. 1231 | Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | 6/3/2005 | 6/3/2005 | | 10/24/2017 |
| Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | UNITED STATES V POINTEK PER CURIAM | 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 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. 1229 | Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | 6/3/2005 | 6/3/2005 | | 10/24/2017 |
| Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | UNITED STATES V GONZALEZ - 61 MJ 633 | Appellant 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 wrongful use of cocaine, one specification of wrongful distribution of cocaine, and one specification of wrongful introduction of cocaine onto a U.S. Coast Guard installation, in violation of Article 112a, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); and one specification of unlawful entry into the barracks room of a seaman, in violation of Article 134, UCMJ. The military judge sentenced Appellant to a bad-conduct discharge, confinement for 135 days, and reduction to E-1. The Convening Authority approved the adjudged sentence, but, in accordance with the pretrial agreement, suspended execution of confinement in excess of sixty-seven days for a period of twelve months from the date sentence was adjudged. The Convening Authority credited Appellant with sixty-seven days of confinement pursuant to United States v. Allen, 17 M.J. 126 (C.M.A. 1984). | Docket No. 1209 | Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | 6/9/2005 | 6/9/2005 | | 10/24/2017 |
| Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | UNITED STATES V SCHRADER 60 MJ 830 | 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 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. 1197 | Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | 1/10/2005 | 1/10/2005 | | 10/24/2017 |
| Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | UNITED STATES V KING 60 MJ 832 | Appellant was tried by special court-martial, military judge alone. Pursuant to a pretrial agreement, Appellant entered pleas of guilty to the following offenses: one specification of unauthorized absence and one specification of failing to go to his place of duty in violation of Article 86, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); three specifications of failure to obey a lawful order and one specification of failure to obey a lawful general order in violation of Article 92, UCMJ; one specification of false official statement in violation of Article 107, UCMJ; one specification of wrongfully using marijuana in violation of Article 112a, UCMJ; three specifications of larceny in violation of Article 121, UCMJ; one specification of wrongfully making and delivering a check without sufficient funds in violation of Article 123a, UCMJ; and one specification of pandering in violation of Article 134, UCMJ. The military judge accepted Appellant’s pleas, entered findings of guilty to those offenses, and sentenced Appellant to a bad-conduct discharge, confinement for eight months, and reduction to E-1. The Convening Authority approved the sentence as adjudged but suspended confinement in excess of sixty-nine days for twelve months from the date Appellant was released from confinement as required by the pretrial agreement. The Convening Authority also credited Appellant with fifty-nine days of pretrial confinement pursuant to United States v. Allen, 17 M.J. 126 (C.M.A. 1984). | Docket No. 1212 | Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | 1/13/2005 | 1/16/2005 | | 10/24/2017 |
| Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | UNITED STATES V MONGROO PER CURIAM | Appellant was tried by general court-martial, 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 making a false official statement, in violation of Article 107, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); one specification of assault with a dangerous weapon, a baseball bat, in violation of Article 128, UCMJ; and one specification of making a false distress call, in violation of Article 134, UCMJ. | Docket No. 1204 | Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | 1/31/2005 | 1/31/2005 | | 10/24/2017 |
| Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | UNITED STATES V BUNGERT PER CURIAM | Appellant 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. 1203 | Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | 2/23/2005 | 2/23/2005 | | 10/24/2017 |
| Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | UNITED STATES V SURBROOK PER CURIAM | Appellant was tried by general court-martial, 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 larceny of U.S. Coast Guard funds in the amounts of $2,400.00, $2,450.00, $2,450.00, $2,450.00, $2,000.00, and $2,400.00, respectively, in violation of Article 121, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). | Docket No. 1201 | Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | 2/5/2005 | 2/5/2005 | | 10/24/2017 |
| Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | UNITED STATES V HEWITT 61 MJ 703 | 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 the following offenses: one specification of forcible sodomy, in violation of Article 125, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); two specifications of indecent assault and one specification of wrongfully providing alcoholic beverage to an individual under the age of twenty-one years, in violation of Article 134, UCMJ.
The judge sentenced Appellant to a dishonorable discharge, confinement for eighty-four months, and reduction to E-1. The Convening Authority approved the sentence as adjudged but suspended confinement in excess of sixty months for twelve months from the date of Appellant’s release from confinement as required by the pretrial agreement. The Convening Authority also credited Appellant with six days of pretrial confinement pursuant to United States v. Allen, 17 M.J. 126 (C.M.A. 1984). | Docket No. 1220 | Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | 3/30/2005 | 3/30/2005 | | 10/24/2017 |
| Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | UNITED STATES V TAYLOR - 61 MJ 640 | Appellant was tried by special court-martial, military judge alone. Pursuant to a pretrial agreement, Appellant entered pleas of guilty to the following offenses: one specification of dereliction of duty by willfully failing to use his Government Travel Card for only official government travel business in violation of Article 92, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); three specifications of false official statements in violation of Article 107, UCMJ; one specification of making a false claim against the United States in violation of Article 132, UCMJ; and one specification of dishonorable failure to pay a lawful debt in violation of Article 134, UCMJ. The military judge accepted Appellant’s pleas, entered findings of guilty to those offenses, and sentenced Appellant to confinement for one hundred days, reduction to pay grade 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. 1207 | Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | 3/31/2005 | 3/31/2005 | | 10/24/2017 |
| Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | UNITED STATES V WALTERS - 61 MJ 637 | Appellant was tried by general court-martial, military judge alone. Pursuant to a pretrial agreement, Appellant, who has over twenty years of Coast Guard active duty and is eligible for retirement, entered pleas of guilty to five specifications of knowing receipt of child pornography in violation of Article 134, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). The military judge accepted Appellant’s pleas, entered findings of guilty to those offenses, and sentenced Appellant to confinement for thirty-six months, 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. 1208 | Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals | 4/27/2005 | 4/27/2005 | | 10/24/2017 |