United States v. ARNOLD

Opinion

Before

DALY, HARRELL, and KORN Appellate Military Judges

_________________________

UNITED STATES

Appellee

v.

Daniel H. ARNOLD

Lance Corporal (E-3), U.S. Marine Corps Appellant

No. 202400368

_________________________

Decided: 11 December 2025

Appeal from the United States Navy-Marine Corps Trial Judiciary

Military Judges:

Derek A. Poteet (Arraignment) Aran T. Walsh (Motions and Trial)

Sentence adjudged 31 May 2024 by a general court-martial tried at Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton, California, consisting of a military judge sitting alone. Sentence in the Entry of Judgment: reduction to E-1, confinement for 12 months, and a dishonorable discharge.

For Appellant:

Ms. Kimberly D. Hinson

For Appellee:

Commander Jeremy R. Brooks, JAGC, USN Commander John T. Cole, JAGC, USN

United States v. Arnold, NMCCA No. 202400368 Opinion of the Court

_________________________

This opinion does not serve as binding precedent, but may be cited as persuasive authority under NMCCA Rule of Appellate Procedure 30.2.

_________________________

PER CURIAM:

Appellant was convicted, consistent with his pleas, of two specifications of sexual abuse of a child, in violation of Article 120b, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for exposing his genitalia and communicating indecent language to a child who had not attained the age of 16 years. 1 Appellant asserts one assignment of error: Are Appellant’s pleas improvident where he could not and did not give an informed waiver of his Constitutional rights? 2 We have carefully considered the matters raised by Appellant in his brief and find they do not require discussion or relief. 3 We have determined that the findings and sentence are correct in law and that no error materially prejudicial to Appellant’s substantial rights occurred. 4 The findings and sentence are AFFIRMED.

FOR THE COURT:

MARK K. JAMISON Clerk of Court

1 10 U.S.C. § 920b.

2 Raised pursuant to United States v. Grostefon, 12 M.J. 431 (C.M.A. 1982).

3 See United States v. Matias, 25 M.J. 356, 361 (C.M.A. 1987).

4 Articles 59 & 66, UCMJ.