UNITED STATES ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS 

Before 

COOK, GALLAGHER, and HAIGHT 

Appellate Military Judges 

UNITED STATES, Appellee 

v. 

Specialist JACOB D. MOON 

United States Army, Appellant 

ARMY 20120112 

Headquarters, Joint Readiness Training Center and Fort Polk 

James L. Varley, Military Judge 

Colonel Keith C. Well, Staff Judge Advocate 

For Appellant: Captain John L. Schriver, JA; Captain Brian J. Sullivan, JA (on 

brief). 

 

For Appellee: Lieutenant Colonel Amber J. Roach (on brief). 

29 March 2013 

----------------------------------- 

SUMMARY DISPOSITION 

----------------------------------- 

Per Curiam: 

A military judge sitting as a general court-martial convicted appellant, 

pursuant to his pleas, of two specifications of wrongful possession of child 

pornography and one specification of wrongful possession of images of nude minors 

and persons appearing to be nude minors, each in violation of Article 134, Uniform 

Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 934 (2006) [hereinafter UCMJ]. The 

convening authority approved the adjudged sentence of a bad-conduct discharge, 

confinement for six months, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and reduction to 

the grade of E-1. 

 

In this case, the military judge made special findings as to the specific images 

involved in this case. Those special findings are set forth in Appellate Exhibit XII 

and are attached to this summary disposition at the Appendix. 

After conducting our Article 66, UCMJ, review, we are not convinced beyond 

a reasonable doubt that all of the depictions underlying one of appellant’s 

convictions of possession of child pornography are, in fact, child pornography as 
MOON—ARMY 20120112 

2 

defined by 18 U.S.C. § 2256(8). Specifically, we find eleven of the forty-six 

depictions of which appellant was convicted of in the Specification of The Charge 

are not child pornography as applicably defined.*

 However, we find that the 

remaining depictions identified in the military judge’s special findings, which form 

the basis of appellant’s convictions, are both legally and factually sufficient. 

CONCLUSION 

On consideration of the entire record and the allegations raised by appellant 

pursuant to United States v. Grostefon, 12 M.J. 431 (C.M.A. 1982), the findings of 

guilty are correct in law and fact and are affirmed. Reassessing the sentence on the 

basis of the factual insufficiencies noted, the entire record, and in accordance with 

the principles of United States v. Sales, 22 M.J. 305 (C.M.A. 1986) and United 

States v. Moffeit, 63 M.J. 40 (C.A.A.F. 2006), to include the factors identified by 

Judge Baker in his concurring opinion, the sentence is AFFIRMED. 

 FOR THE COURT: 

KENNETH J. TOZZI 

COL, JA 

Acting Clerk of Court 

                                                           

*

 Contrary to the military judge’s special findings of the Specification of The 

Charge, we are not convinced beyond a reasonable doubt the following depictions 

are child pornography: 

(1) Under Exhibit 7/8: Evidence #196, Evidence #200, Evidence #213, 

Evidence #217, Evidence #221, Evidence #238; 

(2) Under Exhibit 12: Evidence #28, Evidence #32, Evidence #49, 

Evidence #53, Evidence #72. 

KENNETH J. TOZZI 

COL, JA 

Acting Clerk of Court