United States v. Mathews

UNITED STATES COAST GUARD COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS UNITED STATES v. Joshua D. MATHEWS Gunner’s Mate Second Class (E-5), U.S. Coast Guard CGCMSP 24955 Docket No. 1451 December 2017 Special Court-Martial convened by Commander, Eleventh Coast Guard District. Tried at San Diego, California, on 8 December 2016.

Military Judge: CDR Ted R. Fowles, USCG Trial Counsel: LT Emily C. Miletello, USCGR Assistant Trial Counsel: LCDR Joel C. Coito, USCG Defense Counsel: LT Kelly L. Haupt, USCG Appellate Defense Counsel: LT Jason W. Roberts, USCGR Appellate Government Counsel: LCDR Tereza Z. Ohley, USCGR

BEFORE MCCLELLAND, BRUCE & JUDGE Appellate Military Judges

Per curiam: Appellant was tried by special court-martial, military judge alone. Pursuant to his pleas, entered in accordance with a pretrial agreement, Appellant was convicted of one specification of willfully disobeying a superior commissioned officer, in violation of Article 90, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); one specification of assault and battery, in violation of Article 128, UCMJ; and one specification of obstructing justice, in violation of Article 134, UCMJ. The military judge sentenced Appellant to reduction to E-1, confinement for sixty days, and a bad- conduct discharge. The Convening Authority approved only so much of the sentence extending to reduction to E-1, confinement for forty-three days and a bad-conduct discharge and suspended the bad-conduct discharge, in accordance with the pretrial agreement.

United States v. Joshua D. MATHEWS, No. 1451 (C.G.Ct.Crim.App. 2017) 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.

Decision 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 below, are affirmed.

For the Court,

Sarah P. Valdes Clerk of the Court