United States v. Criffield
This text of 47 M.J. 419 (United States v. Criffield) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Appellant alleges that his conviction for possession of a homemade silencer is multi-plicious with his convictions for wrongfully making and wrongfully transporting the firearm silencer, all charged under the assimila-tive crimes portion of Article 134, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 USC § 934, which incorporated 26 USC § 5861(d), (e), and (f).
At trial, defense counsel moved to dismiss the specification alleging wrongful transfer of the silencer as being multiplieious for both findings and sentencing with the specification of possession of the silencer. The military judge found that they were not multiplieious for any purpose but, instead, ruled that the specification for making the silencer was multiplieious with the specification for possession of the silencer and instructed the members that they were to consider these offenses as one for sentencing purposes. The members sentenced appellant to a bad-conduct discharge, hard labor without confinement for 30 days, a $500.00 fine, and reduction to the lowest enlisted grade.
Although the judge was within his discretion to treat these offenses as multiplieious for sentencing, we hold that the judge did not err as a matter of law by finding that the offenses were not multiplieious for findings. See United States v. Neblock, 45 MJ 191, 198-99 (1996).
The decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
47 M.J. 419, 1998 CAAF LEXIS 10, 1998 WL 42532, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-criffield-armfor-1998.