CreatorTitleDescriptionPublication NumberOrganizationPublication DateEffective DateExpiration DateUploaded On
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V KESSLER - PER CURIAMAppellant was tried by special court-martial, military judge alone. Pursuant to her pleas of guilty, entered in accordance with a pretrial agreement, Appellant was convicted of the following offenses: one specification of physically controlling a passenger car while impaired by ecstasy, a schedule one controlled substance, in violation of Article 111, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); and two specifications of wrongful use of ecstasy, in violation of Article 112a, UCMJ. She was also convicted of wrongfully distributing some amount of ecstasy, in violation of Article 112a, UCMJ, after pleading not guilty to that offense.Docket No. 1190Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals1/6/20041/6/200410/18/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V KENDZIORSKI - UNPUBLISHEDUNITED STATES V KENDZIORSKI - UNPUBLISHED Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals OpinionDocket No. 1439Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals 6/12/20176/12/20179/1/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V KELLEY (2025 WL 1198116)A general court-martial of members with enlisted representation convicted Appellant, contrary to his pleas, of possessing child pornography in violation of Article 134, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). Appellant was sentenced to confinement for twelve months, reduction to E-1, and a dishonorable discharge. Judgment was entered accordingly. We heard oral argument on AOEs I and V. Lumping the issues together, we first consider AOEs related to whether Appellant was acquitted (I, II, and part of VI), then those related to whether he was convicted of an offense for which he was not charged (III, IV, V, and the other part of VI), and finally sufficiency of the evidence (VII). We conclude there was no error and affirm. 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. 1495Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals4/25/20254/25/20255/19/2025
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V KEITH - 48 MJ 563UNITED STATES V KEITH - 48 MJ 563 - CGCCA OpinionDocket No. 1071Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals2/26/19982/26/19988/29/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V KEALA - UNPUBLISHEDUNITED STATES V KEALA - UNPUBLISHED - CGCCA OpinionDocket No. 1111Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals12/7/199912/7/19998/29/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V KASPRZYK - UNPUBLISHEDAppellant 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 conspiracy, in violation of Article 81, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); one specification of making a false official statement, in violation of Article 107, UCMJ; and one specification each of wrongful use of cocaine, wrongful introduction of cocaine onto an installation used by or under the control of the armed forces, wrongful distribution of cocaine, wrongful use of marijuana, and wrongful distribution of marijuana, all in violation of Article 112a, UCMJ. The military judge sentenced Appellant to confinement for eight months, reduction to E-1, and a bad-conduct discharge. The Convening Authority approved the sentence as adjudged but suspended all confinement in excess of four months until 8 July 2008, pursuant to the terms of the pretrial agreement.Docket No. 1287Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals2/5/20092/5/200910/30/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V KAHALLEY - 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 the following offenses: one specification of conspiracy, in violation of Article 81, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); one specification of breach of peace, in violation of Article 116, UCMJ; one specification of assault with a dangerous weapon, in violation of Article 128, UCMJ; and one specification each of resisting civil apprehension and reckless endangerment, both in violation of Article 134, UCMJ. The military judge sentenced Appellant to a bad-conduct discharge, confinement for two years, and reduction to E-1. The Convening Authority approved the sentence as adjudged. The pretrial agreement had no effect on the adjudged sentence.Docket No. 1283Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals1/23/20091/23/200910/30/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V JUSIEL 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 wrongful possession of cocaine, one specification of wrongful use of cocaine, one specification of wrongful use of marijuana, one specification of wrongful introduction of cocaine onto a U.S. Coast Guard installation, and one specification of wrongful introduction of marijuana onto a U.S. Coast Guard installation, all in violation of Article 112a, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). The military judge sentenced Appellant to a bad-conduct discharge, confinement for 300 days, and reduction to E-1. Additionally, he granted Appellant 206 days of confinement credit. The Convening Authority approved the sentence as adjudged. The pretrial agreement had no effect on the sentence.Docket No. 1236Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals8/17/20058/17/200510/24/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V JONSSON - 67 MJ 624.PDFAppellant 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 false official statement, in violation of Article 107, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); and one specification of adultery, in violation of Article 134, UCMJ. The military judge sentenced Appellant to a bad-conduct discharge, confinement for thirty days, forfeiture of $1,261 for one month, and reduction to E-3. The Convening Authority approved the sentence as adjudged. The pretrial agreement had no effect on the adjudged sentence.Docket No. 1285Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals1/30/20091/30/200910/30/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V JONES - 64 MJ 621Appellant 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 steal goods, in violation of Article 80, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); four specifications of unauthorized absence and one specification of failure to go to his appointed place of duty, all in violation of Article 86, UCMJ; one specification of wrongful use of cocaine and one specification of wrongful distribution of cocaine, in violation of Article 112a, UCMJ; three specifications of larceny and one specification of wrongful appropriation, in violation of Article 121, UCMJ; and one specification of making checks without sufficient funds with intent to defraud, in violation of Article 123a, UCMJ. The military judge sentenced Appellant to a bad-conduct discharge, confinement for ten months, and reduction to E-1. The Convening Authority approved the adjudged sentence, but suspended confinement in excess of 180 days for twelve months from the date of Appellant’s release from confinement, pursuant to the terms of the pretrial agreement. The Convening Authority noted that all confinement credit would be applied against unsuspended confinement, resulting in confinement for 126 days.Docket No. 1222Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals2/27/20072/27/200710/30/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUnited States V JOHNSTON (MERITS)United States V JOHNSTON (MERITS) Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals OpinionDocket No. 1364Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals1/9/20131/9/20139/18/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V JOHNSON (MERITS)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 making false official statements, in violation of Article 107, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); and five specifications of wrongful distribution, possession, and use of a Schedule I controlled substance, in violation of Article 112a, UCMJ. The military judge sentenced Appellant to confinement for five months, reduction to E-1, and a bad-conduct discharge. The Convening Authority approved the sentence as adjudged, but suspended confinement in excess of 120 days for twelve months, pursuant to the pretrial agreement.Docket No. 1308Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals7/29/20097/29/200910/30/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V JOHNSON - 65 MJ 919Appellant 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 dereliction of duty, in violation of Article92, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); one specification of willful and wrongful damage to personal property owned by another, in violation of Article 109, UCMJ; and one specification each of wrongful use, wrongful distribution, and wrongful introduction of cocaine onto a vessel, aircraft, vehicle, or installation used by the armed forces, all in violation of Article 112a, UCMJ. The military judge sentenced Appellant to a bad-conduct discharge, confinement for eighteen months, and reduction to E-1. After announcing the sentence, the military judge credited Appellant with 127 days of Allen credit for pretrial confinement served between 25 January 2005 and the date of trial. United States v. Allen, 17 M.J. 126 (C.M.A. 1984). Under the terms of the pretrial agreement, the Convening Authority approved the sentence as adjudged but suspended all confinement in excess of fourteen months for twelve months from the date the accused is released from confinement.Docket No. 1254Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals2/7/20082/7/200810/30/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V JENNINGS - 49 MJ 549UNITED STATES V JENNINGS - Court of Criminal Appeal DecisionDocket No. 1043Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals9/4/19989/4/19988/29/2017
Coast Guard Court of Criminal AppealsUNITED STATES V JAMES D (2023 WL 7557349)A military judge sitting as a general court-martial convicted Appellant, consistent with his pleas entered in accordance with a plea agreement, of three specifications of possession of child pornography and one specification of distribution of child pornography in violation of Article 134, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). Appellant was sentenced to confinement for six years, reduction to E-1, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and a dishonorable discharge. Judgment was entered accordingly. Appellant asserts that: (1) he suffered illegal pretrial punishment; (2) his counsel were ineffective for failing to address or request credit for pretrial confinement conditions; and (3) he is entitled to relief for unreasonable post-trial delay. We conclude there was no prejudicial error and affirm. 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. 1485Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals11/15/202311/15/202311/15/2023
Page 18 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