Court Opinion

ID: 9915962
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-01-09 14:01:20.892971+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:23:16.911307
License: Public Domain

This opinion is subject to administrative correction before final disposition.

                                Before
                     HACKEL, KIRKBY, and GROSS
                       Appellate Military Judges

                        _________________________

                           UNITED STATES
                               Appellee

                                      v.

                        Teluride M. JONES
                    Private (E-1), U.S. Marine Corps
                               Appellant

                             No. 202300228

                        _________________________

                          Decided: 5 January 2024

    Appeal from the United States Navy-Marine Corps Trial Judiciary

                              Military Judge:
                             Adam J. Workman

 Sentence adjudged 23 May 2023 by a special court-martial convened at
 Marine Corps Base Recruit Depot Parris Island, South Carolina, con-
 sisting of a military judge sitting alone. Sentence in the Entry of Judg-
 ment: confinement for 12 months, forfeiture of $1,278.00 pay per month
 for 12 months, and a bad-conduct discharge. 1

                              For Appellant:
                       Major Joshua P. Keefe, USMC

 1 Appellant was credited with 169 days of pretrial confinement.
                United States v. Jones, NMCCA No. 202300228
                             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 2, 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. 3
   The findings and sentence are AFFIRMED.

                                   FOR THE COURT:

                                   MARK K. JAMISON
                                   Clerk of Court

   2 We note that Appellant was not advised on the record of the maximum possible

punishment for the offenses to which he was pleading guilty as required by Rule for
Courts-Martial 910(c). However, we find no prejudice to Appellant as the punishment
reflected in Appellant’s negotiated plea agreement mirrored, where applicable, the ju-
risdictional maximum punishment of the court. We are therefore convinced that Ap-
pellant’s pleas would not have changed. See United States v. Olivares, No. 201800125,
2020 CCA LEXIS 227 (N-M Ct. Crim. App. 2020 Jul. 8, 2020) (unpublished).
   3 Articles 59 & 66, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. §§ 859, 866.

                                          2