UNITED STATES ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS Before GALLUP, TOZZI, and HAM Appellate Military Judges UNITED STATES, Appellee v. Private E2 ANDREW M. HARLAN United States Army, Appellant ARMY 20060504 Multi-National Corps - Iraq Michael J. Nelson, Military Judge Colonel Michele M. Miller, Staff Judge Advocate (post-trial recommendation) Lieutenant Colonel Scott E. Reid, Acting Staff Judge Advocate (addendum) For Appellant: Mr. Lawrence A. Hildes, Esquire; Captain Seth A. Director, JA (on brief). For Appellee: Colonel John W. Miller II, JA, Major Elizabeth G. Marotta, JA, Major Tami L. Dillahunt, JA, Captain Adam S. Kazin, JA (on brief). 9 December 2008 ----------------------------------------- SUMMARY DISPOSITION ----------------------------------------- Per Curiam: A military judge sitting as a special court-martial empowered to adjudge a bad-conduct discharge, convicted appellant, pursuant to his pleas, of larceny of personal property and wrongfully opening mail, in violation of Articles 121 and 134, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. §§ 921 and 934 [hereinafter UCMJ]. The military judge sentenced appellant to a bad-conduct discharge, five months confinement, forfeiture of $950.00 pay per month for five months, and reduction to E1. The convening authority approved the adjudged sentence. This case is before the court for review pursuant to Article 66, UCMJ. We have considered the entire record of trial, appellant’s assignments of error, the matters personally raised by appellant, and the government’s reply thereto. We find one of appellant’s assignments of error merits brief discussion and relief. Appellant asserts, the government concedes, and we agree that the military judge improperly sentenced appellant to forfeit $950.00 pay per month for five months. Article 19, UCMJ, states a special court-martial is forbidden from imposing forfeitures exceeding two-thirds pay per month. Furthermore, the maximum possible forfeiture of pay per month “shall be based on the grade to which the accused is reduced.” Rule for Courts- Martial 1003(b)(2). The military judge sentenced appellant to a reduction to E1. Consequently, the maximum possible forfeiture of pay per month in this case was $849.00. See 2006 Military Pay Table. We have reviewed the remaining assignments of error and the matters personally raised by appellant pursuant to United States v. Grostefon,12 M.J. 431
(C.M.A. 1982), and conclude they are without merit. The findings of guilty are affirmed. On consideration of the entire record, we affirm only so much of the sentence as provides a bad-conduct discharge, confinement for five months, forfeiture of $849.00 pay per month for five months, and reduction to E1. All rights, privileges, and property of which appellant has been deprived by virtue of that portion of his approved sentence set aside by this decision are ordered resorted. See Articles 58b(c) and 75(a), UCMJ. FOR THE COURT: MALCOLM H. SQUIRES, JR. Clerk of Court
HUGH M. PADGETT, JR. vs DEPARTMENT OF STATE, DIVISION OF LICENSING, ARMY 20060504 (2008)
EUGENE P. KENT vs DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES, ARMY 20060504 (2008)
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, BOARD OF PHARMACY vs ARLENE VERIZZO, R.PH., ARMY 20060504 (2008)
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, BOARD OF MEDICINE vs MANUEL D. VAZQUEZ, M.D., ARMY 20060504 (2008)