Filed: Feb. 28, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: United States Navy–Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals _ UNITED STATES Appellee v. Carlos M. RAMA Lance Corporal (E-3), U.S. Marine Corps Appellant No. 201800324 Appeal from the United States Navy-Marine Corps Trial Judiciary. Decided: 28 February 2019. Military Judge: Lieutenant Colonel Leon J. Francis, USMC. Sentence adjudged 21 June 2018 by a general court-martial convened at Marine Corps Base Hawaii, Kaneohe Bay, Hawaii, consisting of a military judge sitting alone. Sentence approved by c
Summary: United States Navy–Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals _ UNITED STATES Appellee v. Carlos M. RAMA Lance Corporal (E-3), U.S. Marine Corps Appellant No. 201800324 Appeal from the United States Navy-Marine Corps Trial Judiciary. Decided: 28 February 2019. Military Judge: Lieutenant Colonel Leon J. Francis, USMC. Sentence adjudged 21 June 2018 by a general court-martial convened at Marine Corps Base Hawaii, Kaneohe Bay, Hawaii, consisting of a military judge sitting alone. Sentence approved by co..
More
United States Navy–Marine Corps
Court of Criminal Appeals
_________________________
UNITED STATES
Appellee
v.
Carlos M. RAMA
Lance Corporal (E-3), U.S. Marine Corps
Appellant
No. 201800324
Appeal from the United States Navy-Marine Corps Trial Judiciary.
Decided: 28 February 2019.
Military Judge:
Lieutenant Colonel Leon J. Francis, USMC.
Sentence adjudged 21 June 2018 by a general court-martial convened
at Marine Corps Base Hawaii, Kaneohe Bay, Hawaii, consisting of a
military judge sitting alone. Sentence approved by convening authori-
ty: reduction to E-1, confinement for 6 months, and a bad-conduct dis-
charge.
For Appellant:
Lieutenant Colonel Lee C. Kindlon, USMCR.
For Appellee:
Brian K. Keller, Esq.
_________________________
This opinion does not serve as binding precedent under
NMCCA Rule of Appellate Procedure 30.2(a).
_________________________
Before HUTCHISON, TANG, and STEPHENS,
Appellate Military Judges.
United States v. Rama, No. 201800324
PER CURIAM:
After careful consideration of the record, submitted without assignment of
error, we have determined that the approved findings and sentence are cor-
rect in law and fact and that no error materially prejudicial to Appellant’s
substantial rights occurred. Articles 59 and 66, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. §§ 859, 866.
The findings and sentence as approved by the convening authority are
AFFIRMED.
FOR THE COURT:
RODGER A. DREW, JR.
Clerk of Court
2