Court Opinion

ID: 9927289
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-01-26 18:02:10.189112+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:24:17.139379
License: Public Domain

This opinion is subject to administrative correction before final disposition.

                                Before
                    HACKEL, PENNIX, and BLOSSER
                       Appellate Military Judges

                         _________________________

                           UNITED STATES
                               Appellee

                                      v.

                    Dominic I. PANTOVICH
               Lance Corporal (E-3), U.S. Marine Corps
                             Appellant

                             No. 202300297

                         _________________________

                         Decided: 26 January 2024

    Appeal from the United States Navy-Marine Corps Trial Judiciary

                              Military Judge:
                             Adam J. Workman

 Sentence adjudged 15 August 2023 by a special court-martial convened
 at Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, consisting of a
 military judge sitting alone. Sentence in the Entry of Judgment: reduc-
 tion to E-1, confinement for five months, and a bad-conduct discharge. 1

                           For Appellant:
               Commander Kyle Calvin Kneese, JAGC, USN

 1 Appellant was credited with 98 days of pretrial confinement.
               United States v. Pantovich, NMCCA No. 202300297
                              Opinion of the Court

                             _________________________

        This opinion does not serve as binding precedent under
              NMCCA Rule of Appellate Procedure 30.2(a).

                             _________________________

PER CURIAM:
    After careful consideration of the record, submitted without assignment of
error, and Appellant having not challenged the factual sufficiency of this case,
we have determined that the findings are correct in law, the sentence is correct
in law and fact, and that no error materially prejudicial to Appellant’s substan-
tial rights occurred. 2
    The findings and sentence are AFFIRMED.

                                    FOR THE COURT:

                                    MARK K. JAMISON
                                    Clerk of Court

    2 Articles 59 & 66, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. §§ 859, 866.

    We note that the military judge failed to announce the assembly of the special
court-martial. While this was error, we find it was not a jurisdictional defect. Appellant
does not allege prejudice and we find none. See United States v. Goodwin, 60 M.J. 849,
850 (N-M. Ct. Crim. App. 2005) (“Our superior court has held that violations of Article
16, UCMJ, are not jurisdictional, so long as there is ‘substantial compliance’ with its
requirements. Thus, such errors must be tested for prejudice.”) (internal citations and
punctuation omitted).

                                            2