United States v. Sergeant WILLIAM R. KING III ( 2009 )

                                TOZZI, HAM, and SIMS
                              Appellate Military Judges
                              UNITED STATES, Appellant
                            Sergeant WILLIAM R. KING, III
                            United States Army, Appellee
                                    ARMY 20090205
             Headquarters, Joint Readiness Training Center and Fort Polk
                            Charles Hayes, Military Judge
      Colonel James D. Key, Staff Judge Advocate (pretrial and recommendation)
               Colonel Keith C. Well, Staff Judge Advocate (addendum)
    For Appellant:  Major Timothy Thomas, JA; Captain A. Jason Nef, JA.
    For Appellee:  Pursuant to A.C.C.A. Rule 15.2, no response filed.
                                   3 December 2009
                                 SUMMARY DISPOSITION
    Per Curiam:
          A military judge sitting as a general court-martial convicted
    appellant, pursuant to his pleas, of two specifications of indecent
    liberties with a child,[1] one specification of sodomy with a child, three
    specifications of indecent acts with a child, one specification of sexual
    exploitation of a child, and one specification of possession of child
    pornography in violation of Articles 120, 125, and 134, Uniform Code of
    Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. §§ 920, 925, and 934 [hereinafter UCMJ].  The
    military judge sentenced appellant to a dishonorable discharge, confinement
    for twenty-eight years, and reduction to E1.  Pursuant to a pretrial
    agreement, the convening authority approved only so much of the adjudged
    sentence as provided for confinement for eleven years, ten months, and
    eighteen days, and otherwise approved the adjudged sentence.
          Appellant submitted the case on its merits.  However, based on the
    evidence adduced by the military judge in his colloquy with appellant
    during his providence inquiry and the stipulation of fact, we will amend
    three of the specifications.
          First, we amend the Specification of Charge II by excepting the words
    and figures “between 1 February 2007 and 15 June 2008, on divers occasions”
    and substituting therefor the words and figures “about March 2007.”
    Second, we amend Specification 4 of Charge III by excepting the words and
    figures “between 1 February 2007 and 30 September 2007, on divers
    occasions” and substituting therefor the words and figures “about February
    2007.”  Finally, we amend Specification 6 of Charge III by excepting the
    words and figures “that have been transported in interstate and/or foreign
    commerce, by means of cellular phone/electronic mail transmission, in
    violation of 18 U.S.C. Section 2252A(a)(5)(B).”
          We affirm the finding of guilt of the Specification of Charge II and
    Specifications 4 and 6 of Charge III as amended.  The remaining findings
    are affirmed.  Reassessing the sentence on the basis of the errors noted
    and the entire record, and applying the principles of United States v.
    22 M.J. 305
     (C.M.A. 1986) and United States v. Moffeit, including
    Judge Baker’s concurring opinion, 
    63 M.J. 40
    , 43 (C.A.A.F. 2006), the court
    affirms the sentence.
                                      FOR THE COURT:
                                      MALCOLM H. SQUIRES, JR.
                                      Clerk of Court
    [1] Congress promulgated a major change to Article 120, UCMJ, for offenses
    committed on or after 1 October 2007.  Appellant committed one of the acts
    of indecent liberties with a child before the effective date of the change
    and the other offense after the effective date.

Document Info

DocketNumber: ARMY 987654321

Filed Date: 12/3/2009

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 1/9/2015