Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Hicks, 201600170 (2016)

Court: Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals Number: 201600170 Visitors: 14
Filed: Aug. 09, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: U NITED S TATES N AVY –M ARINE C ORPS C OURT OF C RIMINAL A PPEALS _ No. 201600170 _ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Appellee v. THOMAS L. HICKS Corporal (E-4), U.S. Marine Corps Appellant _ Appeal from the United States Navy -Marine Corps Trial Judiciary Military Judge: Major M.D. Sameit, USMC. For Appellant: Captain Bree A. Ermentrout, JAGC, USN. For Appellee: Brian K. Keller, Esq. _ Decided 9 August 2016 _ Before FISCHER, RUGH, and BELSKY, Appellate Military Judges _ After careful consideration of t
More
         U NITED S TATES N AVY –M ARINE C ORPS
             C OURT OF C RIMINAL A PPEALS
                         _________________________

                             No. 201600170
                         _________________________

                 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
                                 Appellee
                                     v.
                         THOMAS L. HICKS
                   Corporal (E-4), U.S. Marine Corps
                               Appellant
                       _________________________
 Appeal from the United States Navy -Marine Corps Trial Judiciary

            Military Judge: Major M.D. Sameit, USMC.
      For Appellant: Captain Bree A. Ermentrout, JAGC, USN.
                For Appellee: Brian K. Keller, Esq.
                      _________________________

                          Decided 9 August 2016
                         _________________________

 Before FISCHER, RUGH, and BELSKY, Appellate Military Judges
                   _________________________

   After careful consideration of the record, submitted without assignment of
error, we affirm the findings and sentence as approved by the convening
authority. Art. 66(c), Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 866(c).
The supplemental court-martial order will reflect that Specifications 1 and 2
under Charge II were merged for sentencing and that Specifications 4 and 5
under Charge II were merged for findings and sentencing.


                               For the Court



                               R.H. TROIDL
                               Clerk of Court

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer