United States v. Rodriguez

U.S. v. Rodriguez

UNITED STATES COAST GUARD COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS Washington, DC UNITED STATES v. James RODRIGUEZ Telecommunications Specialist Second Class, U.S. Coast Guard CGCMG 0137 Docket No. 1097 March 1999 General Court-Martial convened by Commander, Coast Guard Pacific Area. Tried at Coast Guard Island, Alameda, California, on 6-8 February 1997.

Military Judge: CAPT Lane I. McClelland, USCG Trial Counsel: LTJG Martin G. Sarch, USCGR Assistant Trial Counsel: LT Benes Z. Aldana, USCGR Detailed Defense Counsel: LTJG Donna D. Ordine, USCGR Assistant Defense Counsel: LT Jeffrey K. Van Nest, JAGC, USNR Appellate Defense Counsel: LT Sandra K. Selman, USCGR Appellate Government Counsel: LT Benes Z. Aldana, USCGR BEFORE PANEL FOUR BAUM, KANTOR, AND WESTON Appellate Military Judges PER CURIAM: Appellant was tried by a general court-martial before a military judge sitting alone.

Pursuant to his pleas of guilty, entered in accordance with a pretrial agreement, he was convicted of the following offenses: one specification of absence without leave, one specification of assault consummated by a battery, and one specification of indecent assault, in violation of Articles 86, 128, and of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), 10 USC §§886, 928, and 934, respectively. The judge sentenced Appellant to be confined for 32 months, to forfeit all pay and allowances, to be reduced to pay grade E-1, and to be discharged with a bad conduct discharge. The convening authority approved the sentence as adjudged, but suspended for 12 months that part of the sentence adjudging confinement file:///W|/cg094/cca/Court_of_Criminal_Appeals_Opinio...20United%20States%20v.%20Rodriguez,%20Unpublished.htm (1 of 2) [3/10/2011 2:46:30 PM] U.S. v. Rodriguez in excess of 18 months, pursuant to the pretrial agreement.

Before this Court, without admitting that the findings and sentence are correct in fact and law, Appellant has submitted his case on its merits as to any and all issues. The Court has reviewed the record in accordance with Article 66, UCMJ. Upon such review, the findings and sentence are determined to be correct in law and fact and on the basis of the entire record should be approved.

Accordingly, the findings and sentence, as approved and partially suspended below, are affirmed.

For the Court, //s// Brian A. Johnson Clerk of the Court file:///W|/cg094/cca/Court_of_Criminal_Appeals_Opinio...20United%20States%20v.%20Rodriguez,%20Unpublished.htm (2 of 2) [3/10/2011 2:46:30 PM]