United States v. Bickle

UNITED STATES COAST GUARD COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS Washington, D.C. UNITED STATES v. Michael R. BICKLE, Machinery Technician Second Class (E-5), U.S. Coast Guard CGCMG 0219 Docket No. 1269 January 2007 General Court-Martial convened by Commander, Maintenance and Logistics Command Atlantic.

Tried at Cleveland, Ohio, on 17 February 2006.

Military Judge: CAPT Brian M. Judge, USCG Trial Counsel: LT Anthony S. Simpson, USCG Defense Counsel: LT Scott W. Kanalakis, JAGC, USNR Appellate Defense Counsel: LCDR Nancy J. Truax, USCG Appellate Government Counsel: LCDR Patrick M. Flynn, USCG BEFORE PANEL NINE MCCLELLAND, BAUM, & TUCHER Appellate Military Judges Per Curiam: Appellant 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 one specification of violating 18 U.S.C. § 1462 by knowingly using or causing to be used an interactive computer service for carriage of obscene materials in interstate or foreign commerce, two specifications of violating 18 U.S.C. § 2252A by knowingly receiving visual depictions of minors engaged in sexually explicit conduct that had been transported in interstate or foreign commerce, and one specification of violating 18 U.S.C. § 2252A by knowingly possessing visual depictions of minors engaged in sexually explicit conduct, all in violation of Article 134, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). The military judge sentenced Appellant to a bad- conduct discharge, confinement for twenty-nine months, and reduction to E-1. The Convening United States v. Michael R. BICKLE, No. 1269 (C.G.Ct.Crim.App. 2007) Authority approved the sentence as adjudged and suspended confinement in excess of eighteen months for a period of twelve months from the date Appellant is released from confinement, pursuant to the terms of the pretrial agreement.

Before this Court, without admitting that the findings and sentence are correct in law and fact, Appellant has submitted this case on its merits as to any and all errors.

We have 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 of guilty and the sentence, as approved and partially suspended below, are affirmed.

For the Court,

Jane R. Lim Clerk of the Court