Court Opinion

ID: 9501676
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 19:35:41.168755+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:00:43.583458
License: Public Domain

BAKER, Chief Judge
(concurring in the result):
I generally agree with the reasoning of the majority opinion with the exception of footnote 4. Abusive sexual contact is a lesser included offense of aggravated sexual assault where contact with the genitalia is involved. The problem in this case is that the specification did not state the greater offense of aggravated sexual assault because it did not allege contact with the genitalia. Thus, based on the specification in this case, there was no greater offense from which to derive a lesser offense. This resulted in a defective specification with respect to the charge of aggravated sexual assault. However, the specification did state the offense of abusive sexual contact; Appellant was fully on notice of this charge and the factual theory upon which the Government was proceeding. He knew what he had to defend against. Therefore, any defect in the specification was harmless.