Court Opinion

ID: 4124592
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2017-02-08 22:02:14.006991+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:21:07.362713
License: Public Domain

U NITED S TATES AIR F ORCE
             C OURT OF C RIMINAL APPEALS
                          ________________________

                              No. ACM S32382
                          ________________________

                            UNITED STATES
                                Appellee
                                      v.
                            Adam C. LINK
               Senior Airman (E-4), U.S. Air Force, Appellant
                          ________________________

           Appeal from the United States Air Force Trial Judiciary

                          Decided 7 February 2017
                          ________________________

Military Judge: Natalie D. Richardson (sitting alone).
Approved sentence: Bad-conduct discharge, forfeiture of $750 pay per month
for three months, confinement for 120 days, and reduction to E-1. Sentence
adjudged 14 December 2015 by SPCM convened at Nellis Air Force Base, Ne-
vada.
For Appellant: Captain Annie W. Morgan, USAF, and Captain Travis L.
Vaughan, USAF.
For Appellee: Gerald R. Bruce, Esquire.
Before J. BROWN, MINK, and CARRILLO, Appellate Military Judges
                          ________________________

 This is an unpublished opinion and, as such, does not serve as precedent
             under AFCCA Rule of Practice and Procedure 18.4.
                          ________________________
PER CURIAM:
    The approved findings and sentence are correct in law and fact, and no er-
ror materially prejudicial to Appellant’s substantial rights occurred. Articles
                     United States v. Link, No. ACM S32382

59(a) and 66(c), UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. §§ 859(a), 866(c). Accordingly, the approved
findings and sentence are AFFIRMED. 1

                  FOR THE COURT

                  KURT J. BRUBAKER
                  Clerk of the Court

1We note that the Court-Martial Order (CMO) of 16 February 2016 erroneously indi-
cates that the specification under Charge I included the language “on divers occasions”
when it did not. While we find no prejudice, Appellant is entitled to accurate court-
martial records. We thus order promulgation of a corrected CMO.

                                          2