UNITED STATES v. SUTTON (2021)

PUBLISHED OPINION OF THE COURT

After careful consideration of the record, we have determined that the approved findings and sentence are correct in law and fact and that no error materially prejudicial to Appellant's substantial rights occurred.¹

However, we note that the Entry of Judgment is inaccurate, as Block 11 (Pleas and findings for each charge and specification referred to trial, accounting for any modifications by reason of any post-trial action by the convening authority or any post-trial ruling, order, or other determination made by the military judge) inaccurately reflects the findings for Charge II and Additional Charge I.

Moreover, neither the Entry of Judgment nor the Statement of Trial Results account for Charge I and its specifications or for Specification 1 of Charge III, all of which were referred to trial but dismissed by the convening authority prior to arraignment.

The Statement of Trial Results shall consist of the following—

(1) Findings. For each charge and specification referred to trial—

(A) a summary of each charge and specification;

(B) the plea(s) of the accused; and

(C) the finding or other disposition of each charge and specification.

RCM 1101(a) (second emphasis added).

The judgment of the court ․ shall consist of—

(1) Findings. For each charge and specification referred to trial—

(A) a summary of each charge and specification;

(B) the plea of the accused; and

(C) the finding or other disposition of each charge and specification ․

RCM 1111(b) (second emphasis added).

Although we find no prejudice from these errors, Appellant is entitled to have court-martial records that correctly reflect the content of his proceeding.² In accordance with this Court's authority under Rule for Courts-Martial 1111(c)(2), we modify the Entry of Judgment and direct that it be included in the record.

The findings and sentence are AFFIRMED.

United States Navy - Marine Corps

Court of Criminal Appeals

UNITED STATES

v.

Tyler M. SUTTON Lance Corporal (E-3) U.S. Marine Corps Accused

NMCCA NO. 202100009

ENTRY OF JUDGMENT

As Modified on Appeal 1 June 2021

On 18 September 2020, the Accused was tried at Marine Corps Base Hawaii, Kaneohe Bay, Hawaii, by a general court-martial, consisting of a military judge sitting alone. Military Judge Melanie J. Mann presided.

FINDINGS

The following are the Accused's pleas and the Court's findings to all offenses the convening authority referred to trial:

Charge I: Violation of Article 112a, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 912a.

Plea: No Plea Entered.

Finding: Dismissed.

Specification 1: Wrongful distribution of a controlled substance on divers occasions between on or about 1 October 2019 and on or about 31 March 2020.

Plea: No Plea Entered.

Finding: Dismissed.

Specification 2: Wrongful use of a controlled substance on divers occasions between on or about 1 January 2020 and on or about 20 March 2020, and on or about 16 April 2020.

Plea: No Plea Entered.

Finding: Dismissed.

Specification 3: Wrongful distribution of a controlled substance on divers occasions between on or about 1 October 2019 and on or about 31 March 2020.

Plea: No Plea Entered.

Finding: Dismissed.

Charge II: Violation of Article 92, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 892.

Plea: Guilty.

Finding: Guilty.

Specification 1: Violation of a lawful general regulation by wrongfully introducing controlled substance analogues onto a military installation with the intent to induce intoxication, excitation, and stupefaction on divers occasions between on or about 1 October 2019 and on or about 31 March 2020.

Plea: Guilty Except “on divers occasions.”

Finding: Guilty in Accordance with Plea.

Specification 2: Violation of a lawful general regulation by wrongfully using controlled substance analogues with the intent to induce intoxication, excitation, and stupefaction on divers occasions between on or about 1 October 2019 and on or about 21 March 2020.

Plea: Guilty Except “on divers occasions.”

Finding: Guilty in Accordance with Plea.

Specification 3: Violation of a lawful general regulation by wrongfully possessing controlled substance analogues with the intent to induce intoxication, excitation, and stupefaction on divers occasions between on or about 1 October 2019 and on or about 31 March 2020.

Plea: Guilty Except “on divers occasions.”

Finding: Guilty in Accordance with Plea.

Specification 4: Violation of a lawful general regulation by wrongfully distributing controlled substance analogues with the intent to induce intoxication, excitation, and stupefaction between on divers occasions on or about 1 October 2019 and on or about 31 March 2020.

Plea: Guilty Except “on divers occasions.”

Finding: Guilty in Accordance with Plea.

Specification 5: Violation of a lawful general regulation by possessing drug paraphernalia between on or about 1 October 2019 and on or about 21 March 2020.

Plea: Guilty by Exceptions.

Finding: Guilty in Accordance with Plea.

Charge III: Violation of Article 107, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 907.

Plea: Guilty.

Finding: Guilty.

Specification 1: False official statement.

Plea: No Plea Entered.

Finding: Dismissed.

Specification 2: False official statement.

Plea: Guilty.

Finding: Guilty.

Charge IV: Violation of Article 131b, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 931b.

Plea: Not Guilty.

Finding: Dismissed.

Specification: Obstructing justice on or about 24 April 2020.

Plea: Not Guilty.

Finding: Dismissed.

Charge V: Violation of Article 115, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 915.

Plea: Not Guilty.

Finding: Dismissed.

Specification: Communicating a threat on or about 24 April 2020.

Plea: Not Guilty.

Finding: Dismissed.

Additional

Charge I: Violation of Article 112a, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 912a.

Plea: Guilty.

Finding: Guilty.

Specification: Wrongful use of controlled substances on or about 16 April 2020.

Plea: Guilty by Exceptions of Wrongful Use of Oxycodone.

Finding: Guilty in Accordance with Plea.

Additional

Charge II: Violation of Article 131b, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 931b.

Plea: Not Guilty.

Finding: Dismissed.

Specification: Obstruction of justice on or about 1 April 2020.

Plea: Not Guilty.

Finding: Dismissed.

SENTENCE

On 18 September 2020, a military judge sentenced the Accused to the following:

Forfeiture of $1155 pay per month for 12 months.

Reduction to pay grade E-1.

For Specification 1 of Charge II: confinement for 12 months.

For Specification 2 of Charge II: confinement for 12 months.

For Specification 3 of Charge II: confinement for 12 months.

For Specification 4 of Charge II: confinement for 12 months.

For Specification 5 of Charge II: confinement for 12 months.

For Specification 2 of Charge III: confinement for 12 months.

For the Specification of Additional Charge I: confinement for 12 months.

The terms of confinement will run concurrently.

Confinement for a total of 12 months.

A bad-conduct discharge.

The Accused has served 147 days pretrial confinement and shall be credited with 147 days of confinement already served, to be deducted from the adjudged sentence to confinement.

FOOTNOTES

1.   Uniform Code of Military Justice arts. 59, 66, 10 U.S.C. §§ 859, 866.

2.   United States v. Crumpley, 49 M.J. 538, 539 (N.M. Ct. Crim. App. 1998).

PER CURIAM: