Filed: May 09, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals _ UNITED STATES Appellee v. Kailer J. ALLERS Operations Specialist Third Class (E-4), U.S. Navy Appellant No. 201900001 Appeal from the United States Navy-Marine Corps Trial Judiciary. Decided: 9 May 2019. Military Judge: Commander Hayes Larsen, JAGC, USN. Sentence adjudged 8 August 2018 by a general court-martial convened at Naval Station Norfolk, Norfolk, Virginia, consisting of a military judge sitting alone. Sentence approved by conve
Summary: United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals _ UNITED STATES Appellee v. Kailer J. ALLERS Operations Specialist Third Class (E-4), U.S. Navy Appellant No. 201900001 Appeal from the United States Navy-Marine Corps Trial Judiciary. Decided: 9 May 2019. Military Judge: Commander Hayes Larsen, JAGC, USN. Sentence adjudged 8 August 2018 by a general court-martial convened at Naval Station Norfolk, Norfolk, Virginia, consisting of a military judge sitting alone. Sentence approved by conven..
More
United States Navy-Marine Corps
Court of Criminal Appeals
_________________________
UNITED STATES
Appellee
v.
Kailer J. ALLERS
Operations Specialist Third Class (E-4), U.S. Navy
Appellant
No. 201900001
Appeal from the United States Navy-Marine Corps Trial Judiciary.
Decided: 9 May 2019.
Military Judge:
Commander Hayes Larsen, JAGC, USN.
Sentence adjudged 8 August 2018 by a general court-martial convened
at Naval Station Norfolk, Norfolk, Virginia, consisting of a military
judge sitting alone. Sentence approved by convening authority: reduc-
tion to E-1, confinement for 10 months, and a bad-conduct discharge.
For Appellant:
Lieutennt Commander Jacqueline M. Leonard, JAGC, USN.
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 ATTANANSIO,
Appellate Military Judges.
United States v. Allers, No. 201900001
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