Filed: Apr. 17, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals _ UNITED STATES Appellee v. Jovontia D. LYONS Gas Turbine Systems Technician (Mechanical) Petty Officer Third Class (E-4), U.S. Navy Appellant No. 201800356 Appeal from the United States Navy-Marine Corps Trial Judiciary. Decided: 17 April 2019. Military Judge: Captain Aaron C. Rugh, JAGC, USN. Sentence adjudged 21 August 2018 by a special court-martial con- vened at Naval Base San Diego, California, consisting of a military judge sitting
Summary: United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals _ UNITED STATES Appellee v. Jovontia D. LYONS Gas Turbine Systems Technician (Mechanical) Petty Officer Third Class (E-4), U.S. Navy Appellant No. 201800356 Appeal from the United States Navy-Marine Corps Trial Judiciary. Decided: 17 April 2019. Military Judge: Captain Aaron C. Rugh, JAGC, USN. Sentence adjudged 21 August 2018 by a special court-martial con- vened at Naval Base San Diego, California, consisting of a military judge sitting ..
More
United States Navy-Marine Corps
Court of Criminal Appeals
_________________________
UNITED STATES
Appellee
v.
Jovontia D. LYONS
Gas Turbine Systems Technician (Mechanical)
Petty Officer Third Class (E-4), U.S. Navy
Appellant
No. 201800356
Appeal from the United States Navy-Marine Corps Trial Judiciary.
Decided: 17 April 2019.
Military Judge:
Captain Aaron C. Rugh, JAGC, USN.
Sentence adjudged 21 August 2018 by a special court-martial con-
vened at Naval Base San Diego, California, consisting of a military
judge sitting alone. Sentence approved by convening authority: con-
finement for 120 days and a bad-conduct discharge.
For Appellant:
Major Matthew A. Blackwood, 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 FULTON, HITESMAN, and GERDING,
Appellate Military Judges.
United States v. Lyons, No. 201800356
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 the 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