United States v. Hinders ( 2014 )


Menu:
  •               UNITED STATES NAVY-MARINE CORPS
    COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
    WASHINGTON, D.C.
    Before
    J.R. MCFARLANE, K.J. BRUBAKER, P.D. LOCHNER
    Appellate Military Judges
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
    v.
    MATTHEW S. HINDERS
    CORPORAL (E-4), U.S. MARINE CORPS
    NMCCA 201400274
    SPECIAL COURT-MARTIAL
    Sentence Adjudged: 25 March 2014.
    Military Judge: LtCol C.J. Thielemann, USMC.
    Convening Authority: Commanding General, 1st Marine
    Division (Rein), Camp Pendleton, CA.
    Staff Judge Advocate's Recommendation: Maj V.G. Laratta,
    USMC.
    For Appellant: Maj Michael D. Berry, USMCR.
    For Appellee: Mr. Brian K. Keller, Esq.
    23 December 2014
    ---------------------------------------------------
    OPINION OF THE COURT
    ---------------------------------------------------
    THIS OPINION DOES NOT SERVE AS BINDING PRECEDENT, BUT MAY BE CITED AS
    PERSUASIVE AUTHORITY UNDER NMCCA RULE OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE 18.2.
    PER CURIAM:
    A military judge sitting as a special court-martial
    convicted the appellant, pursuant to his pleas, of two
    specifications of larceny, in violation of Article 121, Uniform
    Code of Military Justice, 
    10 U.S.C. § 921
    . The appellant was
    sentenced to four months’ confinement, reduction to pay grade
    E-1, and a bad-conduct discharge. The convening authority
    approved the sentence as adjudged.
    Although not raised on appeal, we note an error in the
    record that requires corrective action. The two larceny
    specifications are multiplicious, requiring a consolidation of
    the specifications. Having considered our modified findings and
    the entire record of trial, we conclude that the consolidated
    findings are correct in law and fact, and that no error
    materially prejudicial to the substantial rights of the
    appellant remains. Arts. 59(a) and 66(c), UCMJ.
    Background
    The appellant entered the barracks room of two fellow
    Marines, stealing several items of personal property belonging
    to Lance Corporal S and one item of personal property belonging
    to Private First Class S. The Government charged the larceny as
    thefts of personal property from the individual Marines in two
    separate specifications, although the theft took place at the
    same time and at the same location. Although neither party
    objected during the plea colloquy, after hearing sentencing
    arguments and closing for deliberation, the military judge
    returned and, sua sponte, raised the issue of multiplicity.
    Record at 90-91. Although finding that the theft was a single
    criminal act, the military judge did not consolidate the
    specifications, but merged them together “solely for sentencing
    purposes.” 
    Id. at 91
    .
    Discussion
    When a larceny of several articles is committed at
    substantially the same time and place, it is a single larceny,
    even though the articles belong to different persons. MANUAL FOR
    COURTS-MARTIAL, UNITED STATES (2012 ed.), Part IV, ¶ 46(c)(1)(i)(ii).
    The specifications, as alleged and pled to by the appellant,
    were multiplicious, as the larceny from the barracks room should
    properly have been charged as one offense, not two.
    Absent plain error, a multiplicity claim is waived by an
    unconditional guilty plea, as was entered in this case. United
    States v. Hudson, 
    59 M.J. 357
    , 358-59 (C.A.A.F. 2004) (citing
    United States v. Heryford, 
    52 M.J. 265
    , 266 (C.A.A.F. 2000)).
    Reviewing the matter for plain error and mindful of the
    Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces’ holding in United States
    v. Savage, 
    50 M.J. 244
    , 245 (C.A.A.F. 1999) (citing Ball v.
    United States, 
    470 U.S. 856
     (1985)), we find there was error,
    2
    that it was plain and obvious, and that there was prejudice in
    the form of an additional convictions for larceny.
    Pursuant to our authority under Article 66(c) UCMJ, we
    grant relief by consolidation of Specifications 1 and 2 under
    Charge I into a single specification as follows:
    In that Corporal Matthew S. Hinders, U.S. Marine
    Corps, on active duty, did, at or near Marine Corps
    Base Camp Pendleton, California, on or about 21 July
    2013, steal various items to include:
    a.   MacBook Pro Laptop
    b.   Playstation Portable Vita
    c.   Sentry Safe
    d.   2006 One Dollar Coin Fine Silver
    e.   1991 American Silver Eagle Dollar 1 oz.
    silver coin
    f.   2002 American Silver Eagle Dollar 1 oz.
    silver coin
    g.   Silver Buillon Dollar
    h.   1776-1976 Silver Dollar
    i.   925 Italy Necklace
    j.   iPod charger
    k.   MacBook Pro Charger
    l.   Dark Knight Trilogy Box Set
    m.   Wahl Clippers and Case
    n.   Grappling Hook
    of a value of more than $500.00, the property of Lance
    Corporal J.C.S. (items a-m) and Private First Class
    J.S.S. (item n), U.S. Marine Corps.
    Since the specifications were merged for sentencing, a
    reassessment of the sentence is unnecessary.
    Conclusion
    As modified herein, the findings and the approved sentence
    are affirmed.
    For the Court
    R.H. TROIDL
    Clerk of Court
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 201400274

Filed Date: 12/23/2014

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 12/31/2014