United States v. Elhardan
This text of United States v. Elhardan (United States v. Elhardan) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
U NITED S TATES N AVY –M ARINE C ORPS C OURT OF C RIMINAL A PPEALS _________________________
No. 201600280 _________________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Appellee v. ADAM R. ELHARDAN Lance Corporal (E-3), U.S. Marine Corps Appellant _________________________ Appeal from the United States Navy-Marine Corps Trial Judiciary
Military Judge: Lieutenant Colonel Eugene H. Robinson, Jr., USMC. Convening Authority: Commanding General, Marine Corps Installations Pacific, Okinawa, Japan. Staff Judge Advocate: Lieutenant Colonel Eric J. Peterson, USMC. For Appellant: Lieutenant Commander Donald R. Ostrom, JAGC, USN. For Appellee: Brian K. Keller, Esq. _________________________
Decided 31 January 2017 _________________________
Before CAMPBELL, RUGH, and H UTCHISON , Appellate Military Judges _________________________
After careful consideration of the record, submitted without assignment of error, we affirm the findings and sentence as approved by the convening authority. Art. 66(c), Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 866(c). The supplemental court-martial order will reflect that the military judge consolidated Specifications 1 and 2 of the Additional Charge into a single specification for findings and sentence,1 to read as follows: In that Lance Corporal Adam R. Elhardan, U.S. Marine Corps, while on active duty, did, at or near Okinawa and Iwakuni, Japan, between on or about 12 March 2015 and on or about 16 April 2015, knowingly and wrongfully possess child pornography, to wit: digital images, of minors, engaging in sexually explicit conduct; and, digital images of
1 Record at 261. United States v. Elhardan, No. 201600280
what appears to be minors, engaging in sexually explicit conduct; and, that said conduct was to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces and was of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces. For the Court
R.H. TROIDL Clerk of Court
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
United States v. Elhardan, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-elhardan-nmcca-2017.