United States v. PANETO

• Court: Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals
• Decided: June 12, 2026
• Docket: 202500190
• Status: Published

Opinion

Before DALY, HARRELL, and ATTANASIO Appellate Military Judges

_________________________

UNITED STATES Appellee

v.

Raul J. PANETO Operations Specialist Second Class (E-5), U.S. Navy Appellant

No. 202500190

Decided: 12 June 2026

Appeal from the United States Navy-Marine Corps Trial Judiciary

Military Judge: Adam G. Partridge

Sentence adjudged 28 February 2025 by a general court-martial tried at Naval Air Station Jacksonville, Florida, consisting of officer and en- listed members. Sentence in the Entry of Judgment: no punishment.

For Appellant: Lieutenant Commander Alaric A. Piette, JAGC, USN United States v. Paneto, NMCCA No. 202500190 Opinion of the Court

This opinion does not serve as binding precedent under NMCCA Rule of Appellate Procedure 30.2(a).

_________________________ PER CURIAM: After careful consideration of the record, submitted without assignment of error, we have determined that the findings and sentence are correct in law and that no error materially prejudicial to Appellant’s substantial rights oc- curred. 1 However, although not raised by either party, we note that the Entry of Judgment (EOJ) fails to identify with sufficient specificity the offense for which Appellant was convicted in Specification 7 of Charge I. 2 Although we find no prejudice, Appellant is entitled to have court-martial records that correctly re- flect the content of his proceeding. 3 In accordance with R.C.M. 1111(c)(2), we modify the EOJ and direct that it be included in the record. The findings and sentence are AFFIRMED.

FOR THE COURT:

MARK K. JAMISON Clerk of Court

1 Articles 59 & 66, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. §§ 859, 866.

2 In Specification 7 of Charge I, Appellant was charged with a violation of Article

128b, UCMJ. The members found Appellant not guilty of that offense, but guilty of a lesser included offense—communicating a threat, in violation of Article 115, UCMJ. The EOJ, however, reflects only a conviction for an unspecified lesser included offense and fails to identify the specific offense committed or the specific punitive article vio- lated. See R.C.M. 1111(b) (requiring EOJ to include, for each charge referred to court- martial, a summary of each charge and specification, the plea of the accused, and the disposition of each charge, as well as the sentence awarded); see also United States v. Wadaa, 84 M.J. 652, 655 (N-M. Ct. Crim. App. 2024) (setting forth minimal require- ments for EOJs to properly set forth a summary of the charges and specifications); Manual for Courts-Martial, pt. IV, ¶3.b.(6) (explaining that “[i]f a court-martial finds an accused guilty of a lesser included offense, the finding as to the charge shall state a violation of the specific punitive article violated . . . .”). 3 United States v. Crumpley, 49 M.J. 538, 539 (N-M. Ct. Crim. App. 1998).

2 UNITED STATES NMCCA NO. 202500190

v. ENTRY OF Raul J. PANETO JUDGMENT Operations Specialist Second Class (E-5) As Modified on Appeal U.S. Navy Accused 12 June 2026

From 16 October 2024 to 28 February 2025, the Accused was tried at Naval Air Station Jacksonville, Florida, by a general court-martial, consisting of of- ficer and enlisted members. Military Judge Adam G. Partridge presided.

FINDINGS

The following are the Accused’s pleas and the Court’s findings to all of- fenses referred to trial:

Charge I: Violation of Article 128b, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), 10 U.S.C. § 928b Plea: Not Guilty. Finding: Guilty.

Specification 1: Domestic Violence by commission of a violent offense against the intimate partner of the accused, at or near Little Creek, VA, on or about 4 November 2019, to wit: unlawfully grabbing and squeezing her arms and pushing her body with his hands.

Plea: Not Guilty. Finding: Not Guilty.

Specification 2: Domestic Violence by commission of a violent offense against the intimate partner of the accused, at or near Gaithersburg, MD, on or United States v. Paneto, NMCCA No. 202500190 Modified Entry of Judgment

about 27 February 2021, to wit: unlawfully striking her face with his hand.

Specification 3: Domestic Violence by commission of a violent offense against the spouse of the accused, at or near Gaithersburg, MD, on or about 5 July 2021, to wit: unlawfully striking her legs with his hands and pushing her body with his hands.

Specification 4: Domestic Violence by commission of a violent offense against the spouse of the accused, at or near Gaithersburg, MD, on or about 17 March 2022, to wit: unlawfully pressing his hands and fingers into her thighs, squeezing her thighs with his hands, pulling her hair with his hands, and striking her face with his hands.

Specification 5: Domestic Violence by commission of a violation of the UCMJ against any property, with the intent to threaten and intimidate the spouse of the accused, on board Naval Station Mayport, FL, on or about 17 December 2022, to wit: willfully and wrongfully destroy an iPhone cellular device, of a value of about $1000, the property of CS2 G.T.

Specification 6: Domestic Violence by commission of a violation of the UCMJ against any person, with the intent to threaten and intimidate the spouse of the accused, at or near Jacksonville, FL, on or about 6 February 2023, to wit: wrongfully communicate to CS2 G.T. a threat to injure her reputation by broadcasting intimate visual images of CS2 G.T. on social media by communicating certain language to her, to wit:

2 United States v. Paneto, NMCCA No. 202500190 Modified Entry of Judgment

“we are blasting you across every social media,” “making a fool out of you,” or words to that effect, and sending intimate visual images of CS2 G. T. to her via text message.

Plea: Not Guilty. Finding: Guilty.

Specification 7: Domestic Violence by commission of a violation of the UCMJ against any person, with the intent to threaten and intimidate the spouse of the accused, at or near Jacksonville, FL, on or about 24 March 2023, to wit: wrongfully communicate to CS2 G.T. a threat to injure her person by communicating certain language to CS2 G.T., to wit: “meet me at the gas station tonight ... Make sure your boyfriend there ... I need a witness ... Bitch is really trying me today ... Be scared mf ... Coming for ya jugular,” or words to that effect, and “I been waiting to pull this trigger don’t worry. No deployment or lawyer, cop or anyone going to make you safe for what’s coming ... make sure your boyfriend at your house tonight ... ima be there” or words to that effect.

Plea: Not Guilty. Finding: Not Guilty, but Guilty to the lesser included offense of Article 115, Communicating a Threat.

Specification 8: Domestic Violence by commission of a violation of the UCMJ against any against any property with the intent to threaten and intimidate the spouse of the accused, at or near Jacksonville, FL, on or about 24 March 2023, to wit: willfully and wrongfully destroy purses, makeup, clothing, and personal accessories of a value of about $500, the property of CS2 G.T.

Specification 9: Domestic Violence by commission of a violent offense against the spouse of the accused, at or near Jacksonville, FL, on or about 15 October 2023, to wit: assault her by offering to strike her with his vehicle.

3 United States v. Paneto, NMCCA No. 202500190 Modified Entry of Judgment

Specification 10: Domestic Violence by wrongful violation of a Protective Order with the intent to threaten and intimidate the spouse of the accused, at or near Jacksonville, FL, between about 1 February 2024 and 15 March 2024, by initiating harassing communications with CS2 G.T. through text message communications.

Charge II: Violation of Article 130, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 930 Plea: Not Guilty. Finding: Withdrawn and dismissed.*

Specification: Stalking at or near Jacksonville, FL, on or about 6 February 2023.

Plea: Not Guilty. Finding: Withdrawn and dismissed.*

* The Government withdrew and dismissed Charge II and the Specification thereunder after presentation of its case.

SENTENCE

On 28 February 2025, the members sentenced the Accused to the follow- ing: No punishment.