United States v. Hendrickson
This text of 16 M.J. 62 (United States v. Hendrickson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Court of Military Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Opinion of the Court
In separate specifications appellant was convicted of having possessed 100 units more or less of Lysergic Acid Diethylamide (LSD) on board the USS SPERRY on or about May 18, 1982, and with having wrongfully introduced 100 units more or less of LSD into the USS SPERRY on or about May 18, 1982, in violation of Article 92, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 892. It appears from the allegations in each specification and from the evidence adduced at trial that the LSD possessed on board the USS SPERRY on May 18, 1982, was the same LSD introduced the same day into the same ship. Accordingly, the specification alleging wrongful possession duplicated that alleging wrongful introduction, and the finding as to the former offense cannot stand. United States v. Miles, 15 M.J. 431 (C.M.A.1983); United States v. Gonnella, 14 M.J. 176 (C.M.A.1982); United States v. Roman-Luciano, 13 M.J. 490 (C.M.A.1982); see United States v. Doss, 15 M.J. 409 (C.M.A.1983); United States v. Baker, 14 M.J. 361 (C.M.A.1983).
Notwithstanding the failure of the military judge to indicate whether he treated these specifications as multiplicious for sentencing purposes, we are convinced — in light of the jurisdictional limits of the special court-martial which tried appellant,1 [63]*63the other offenses involved,2 and appellant’s prior record of four nonjudicial punishments — that appellant’s sentence3 was not enhanced by failure to set aside the multiplicious finding. Accordingly, no relief in the sentence is required.
The decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review is reversed as to specification 3 of Charge I (wrongful possession of LSD). The finding of guilty of specification 3 of Charge I is set aside, and that specification is dismissed. In all other respects the decision is affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
16 M.J. 62, 1983 CMA LEXIS 19738, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-hendrickson-cma-1983.