United States v. Private First Class SLADE E. MCKIM-BURWELL ( 2014 )


Menu:
  • UNITED STATES ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
    Before
    KERN, ALDYKIEWICZ, and MARTIN
    Appellate Military Judges
    UNITED STATES, Appellee
    v.
    Private First Class SLADE E. MCKIM-BURWELL
    United States Army, Appellant
    ARMY 20120719
    Headquarters, Fort Riley
    Jeffery R. Nance, Military Judge
    Lieutenant Colonel John M. Hamner, Staff Judge Advocate
    For Appellant: Major Jacob D. Bashore, JA; Captain Susrut A. Carpenter, JA .
    For Appellee: Major Robert A. Rodriguez, JA.
    20 February 2014
    --------------------------------------------------
    SUMMARY DISPOSITION ON REMAND
    ---------------------------------------------------
    Per Curiam:
    A military judge sitting as a general court -martial convicted appellant,
    pursuant to his pleas, of one specification of knowingly and wrongfully possessing
    some visual depictions involving the use of minors engaging in sexually explicit
    conduct, and one specification of knowingly and wrongfully possessing some visual
    depictions of minors as sexual objects or in a sexually suggestive way. Both
    specifications were in violation of Article 134, Uniform Code of Military Justice
    (Clauses 1 and 2). 
    10 U.S.C. § 934
     (2006) [hereinafter UCMJ]. The military judge
    sentenced appellant to a bad-conduct discharge, confinement for twenty months,
    forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and reduction to the grade of E-1. Pursuant to a
    pretrial agreement, the convening authority approved only seven months
    confinement and the remainder of the sentence.
    On 7 January 2013, this court affirmed the findings of guilty and the sentence.
    United States v. McKim-Burwell, ARMY 20120719 (Army Ct. Crim. App. 7 Jan.
    2013). On 7 February 2014, the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces reversed o ur
    decision as to Specification 2 of The Charge, set aside the finding of guilty of
    MCKIM-BURWELL – ARMY 20120719
    Specification 2 of The Charge, affirmed our decision as to the remaining findings,
    and returned the case to The Judge Advocate General of the Army for remand to this
    court to reassess the sentence. United States v. McKim-Burwell, __ M.J. ___
    (C.A.A.F. February 7, 2014) (summ. disp.).
    Upon remand from our higher court, we are confident , considering the
    remaining findings of guilt, that we can reassess appellant’s sentence at our level.
    United States v. Winckelmann, 
    73 M.J. 11
     (C.A.A.F. 2013); United States v. Sales,
    
    22 M.J. 305
    , 307 n.3 (C.M.A. 1986). The appellant remains convicted of a Clause 1
    and 2 Article 134, UCMJ offense, knowingly and wrongfully possessing some visual
    depictions involving the use of minors engaging in sexually explicit conduct (child
    pornography). * Appellant’s approved sentence to a reduction to E-1, total forfeiture
    of all pay and allowances, seven months confinement, and a bad-conduct discharge
    is substantially below the maximum punishment. Appellant elected trial by judge
    alone and we “are more likely to be certain of what a military judge would have
    done as opposed to members.” Winckelmann, 73 M.J. at 16. Moreover, the
    remaining specification fully captures the gravamen of appellant’s criminal conduct.
    Finally, we have extensive experience with the remaining conviction, and we are
    confident that we can reliably assess what sentence a military judge would have
    imposed on the remaining findings of guilt. Id.
    Consequently, we are confident the military judge would have adjudged a
    sentence no less severe than that approved by the convening authority in this case.
    Additionally, we find that the sentence approved by the convening authority is
    appropriate. See UCMJ art. 66.
    CONCLUSION
    The remaining findings of guilt have been previously affirmed by both this
    court and the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces. Reassessing the sentence on
    the basis of the error noted, the entire record, and in accordance with the principles
    of Wincklemann, the sentence, as approved by the convening authority, is
    AFFIRMED.
    FOR
    FORTHETHE
    COURT:
    COURT:
    MALCOLM H. SQUIRES, JR.
    MALCOLM H. SQUIRES, JR.
    Clerk
    Clerkof Court
    of Court
    *
    We note that this offense alone carries a maximum punishment of 10 years
    confinement.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: ARMY 20120719

Filed Date: 2/20/2014

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021