United States v. Thomas ( 2015 )


Menu:
  •           UNITED STATES AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
    UNITED STATES
    v.
    Airman Basic SIR EDWARD S. THOMAS, JR.
    United States Air Force
    ACM S32184 (f rev)
    26 February 2015
    Sentence adjudged 23 September 2013 by SPCM convened at Tinker
    Air Force Base, Oklahoma. Military Judge: Natalie D. Richardson (sitting
    alone).
    Approved Sentence: Bad-conduct discharge and confinement for 2 months.
    Appellate Counsel for the Appellant: Major Christopher D. James.
    Appellate Counsel for the United States:               Major Roberto Ramírez and
    Gerald R. Bruce, Esquire.
    Before
    HECKER, MITCHELL, and CONTOVEROS
    Appellate Military Judges
    OPINION OF THE COURT
    This opinion is issued as an unpublished opinion and, as such, does not serve as precedent
    under AFCCA Rule of Practice and Procedure 18.4.
    PER CURIAM:
    A special court-martial composed of a military judge convicted the appellant,
    pursuant to his pleas, of wrongfully using marijuana and breaking restriction, in violation
    of Articles 112a and 134, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. §§ 912a, 934. The adjudged sentence
    consisted of a bad-conduct discharge and confinement for 2 months. On 11 November
    2013, the convening authority approved the sentence as adjudged.
    On 29 October 2014, we remanded this case for withdrawal of the original action
    and for new post-trial processing after we found plain error when the convening authority
    was not advised about a clemency recommendation made by the military judge. United
    States v. Thomas, ACM S32184 (A.F Ct. Crim App. 29 October 2014) (unpub. op.). On
    5 January 2015, following that corrected post-trial processing, the convening authority
    approved the sentence as originally adjudged. After the case was returned to this court on
    14 January 2015, the appellant elected not to file a supplemental assignment of error.
    The approved findings and sentence are correct in law and fact, and no error
    prejudicial to the substantial rights of the appellant occurred. Articles 59(a) and 66(c),
    UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. §§ 859(a), 866(c). Accordingly, the findings and sentence are
    AFFIRMED.
    FOR THE COURT
    STEVEN LUCAS
    Clerk of the Court
    2                            ACM S32184 (f rev)
    

Document Info

Docket Number: ACM S32184 (f rev)

Filed Date: 2/26/2015

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 2/27/2015