Court Opinion

ID: 9398344
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-05-30 22:01:32.750991+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:19:32.984173
License: Public Domain

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

                          No. ACM S32735
                       ________________________

                         UNITED STATES
                             Appellee
                                  v.
                      Daniel J. PORTERIE
           Senior Airman (E-4), U.S. Air Force, Appellant
                        ________________________

       Appeal from the United States Air Force Trial Judiciary
                        Decided 30 May 2023
                        ________________________

Military Judge: Brian C. Mason.
Sentence: Sentence adjudged 27 April 2022 by SpCM convened at Joint
Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, New Jersey. Sentence entered by mili-
tary judge on 26 May 2022: Bad-conduct discharge, confinement for 210
days, and reduction to E-2.
For Appellant: Major Alexandra K. Fleszar, USAF.
For Appellee: Lieutenant Colonel Thomas J. Alford, USAF; Mary Ellen
Payne, Esquire.
Before JOHNSON, ANNEXSTAD, and GRUEN, Appellate Military
Judges.
                        ________________________

   This is an unpublished opinion and, as such, does not serve as
   precedent under AFCCA Rule of Practice and Procedure 30.4.
                      ________________________
PER CURIAM:
                     United States v. Porterie, No. ACM S32735

    The findings and sentence as entered are correct in law and fact, and no
error materially prejudicial to the substantial rights of Appellant occurred. Ar-
ticles 59(a) and 66(d), Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. §§ 859(a),
866(d). Manual for Courts-Martial, United States (2019 ed.).*
    Accordingly, the findings and sentence are AFFIRMED.

                       FOR THE COURT

                       CAROL K. JOYCE
                       Clerk of the Court

*Appellant submitted the case to this court for review “on its merits with no specific
assignments of error.” However, a footnote in Appellant’s merits brief specifically re-
quested that this court consider “whether the findings are correct in fact.” We did not
consider factual sufficiency in Appellant’s appeal because Appellant did not comply
with 10 U.S.C. § 866(d)(1)(B)(i) in that Appellant did not make “a specific showing of a
deficiency in proof.” National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021, Pub. L.
No. 116-283, § 542, 134 Stat. 3388, 3612 (1 Jan. 2021). We further note Appellant
pleaded guilty to the offenses of which he was convicted.

                                             2