This opinion is subject to administrative correction before final disposition.

30 O ctober 2020 : A dm inistrative correction to add A ppellee counsel. Before

CRIS FIELD, HOLI FIELD, and LAWRENCE Appellate Military Judges

_________________________



### UNITED STATES Appellee

v.

Mathew W. ANDERSEN Private (E

- 1), U.S. Marine Corps Appellant

No. 20 1900233

Decided: 30 October 2020

Appeal from the United States N avy

- Marine Corps Trial Judiciary

M ilitary Judge : Roger E. Mattioli

Sentence adjudged 12 June 2019 by a speci al court

- martial convened

at Marine Corps Base Quantico

, Virgi nia, consisting of a military judge sitting alone. Sentence in the Entry of Judgment : forfeiture of $1120.60 per month for four months and a bad conduct discharge

.

For Appellant: Commander Mark Takla, JAGC, USN

For Appellee:

Lieutenant Kevin G. Edwards II , JAGC, USN

L ieutenant Jo shua C. F iveson, J AGC, USN

_________________________U nited States v. Andersen

, NMCCA No. 20 1900233 Opinion of the Court

2 This opinion does not serve as binding prece dent, but may be cited as persuasive authority under

NMCCA Rule of Appellate Procedure 30.2.

_________________________

PER CURIAM:

A military j udge sitting as a speci al court

- martial convicted Appellant

, pursuant to his pleas, of three specification s of la rceny and one specification

of unlawful entry, in violation of Article s 121 and 134 , Uniform Code of Military Justice [UCMJ] , 10 U.S.C. § § 921

, 934

. Appellant asserts on e assignment of error : that the military judge erred when he failed to announce
forfeit ures as an exact dollar amount per month . We agree

.

“ Unless a total forfeiture is adjudged, a sentence to forfeiture shall state

the exact amount in whole dollars to be forfeited each month and the number

of months the forfeitures will last. ” R ule for C our ts

- M artial 1003(b)(2) ( emphasis added ) . Here, the militar y judge announced the forfeitures as

“ $1120.60 per month for a p eriod of four months ” instead of expressing the partial forfeitures as a whole dollar amount per month

. The Entry of Judgment repeats t he forfeiture language as announced.

“ The failure of the military judge to account for forfeitures in a dollar

amount is a clerical error with ‘ no prejudicial impact on the accused, ’ and it is easily remedied. ” United States v. Jewett

, No. 200900167, 2009 CCA LEXIS
688, at *2 (N

- M. Ct. Crim. App. 24 Sept. 2009) (unpub lished op.) (quoting

United States v. Gilgallon

, 2 C.M.R. 170, 172 (C.M.A. 1952)). Failure to use whole doll ars is no different, with the remedy being to reduce forfeitures approved by the conv e ning authority to a whole dollar amount per month.

Accordingly, the findings and only so much of the sentence approved

below as provides for forfeiture of $1,120 .00 pay per month for four mon ths

and a bad

- conduct discharge are affirme d. All rights, privil eges, and property
of which A ppellant has been deprived by virtue of execution of forfeitures in

the Entry of Judgment which have not been affirmed will be restored. We

issue a corrected Entry of Judgment, in accordance with Rule for Courts

Martial 1111(c) (2). After careful consideration of the record, we have

determined that the findings and sentence as modified are correct in law and fact and that no error materially prejudicial to Appellant’s substantial rights

occurred. UCMJ a rts

. 59

, 66

.U nited States v. Andersen

, NMCCA No. 20 1900233 Opinion of the Court

3 T he findings and sentence as modified are AFFIRMED

.

FOR THE COURT:

RODGER A. DREW, JR.

Clerk of Court30 O ctober 2020 : A dm inistrative correction to add A ppellee counsel. UNITED STATES



### v.

Mathew W. ANDERSEN

Private (E

- 1 ) U.S. Marine Corps
Accused NMCCA NO. 201900 233



### ENTRY
OF
JUDGMENT

As Modified on Appeal

30 October 2020

On 12 June 2019, t he Accused was tried at Marine Corps Base Quantico, Virginia, by a special court

- martial

, consisting of a military judge sitting alone. Military Judge Roger E. Mattioli , presid ed

.



### FINDINGS

The following are the Accused’s pleas and the Court’s findings to all offenses the convening authority referred to trial:

Charge I : Violation of Article 121
, Uniform Code of Military Justice

, 10 U.S.C. § 9 21

.
Plea: Guilty.
Finding: Guilty

.

S pecification 1: Larceny between on or about 23 June 2018 and 21 July

2018.

Plea: Guilty

. Finding: Guilty

.

S pecification 2: Larceny between on or about 30 June 2018 and 26 July

2018

.
Plea: Guilty

. Finding: Guilty.United States v. Andersen , NMCCA No. 201900 233 Modified Entry of Judgment

2 S pecification 3: Larceny between on or about 8 August 2018 and 23 August 2018.

Plea: Guilty

. Findi ng: Guilty.

Charge II: Violation of Article 134, Uniform Code of Military Justice

, 10 U.S.C. § 9 34

.
Plea: Guilty

. Finding: Guilty.

S pecification: Unlawful entry on or about 7 October 2018.

Plea: Guilty

. Finding: Guilty.



### SENTENCE

On 12 June 2019, a milita ry judge sentenced the Accused to the following: 1

Forfeiture of $1120

. 00 pay per month for four months.

A bad

- conduct discharge.

FOR THE COURT:

RODGER A. DREW, JR.

Clerk of Court

1 The military judge also sentenced the Accused to confinement for four months. However, the convening authority disapproved all confinement in accordance with the plea
agreement.