Court Opinion

ID: 4384810
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2019-04-06 06:01:35.419108+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:22:43.890158
License: Public Domain

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

                               No. ACM 39519
                          ________________________

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

        Appeal from the United States Air Force Trial Judiciary
                           Decided 4 April 2019
                          ________________________

Military Judge: Donald R. Eller, Jr.
Approved sentence: Dishonorable discharge, confinement for 24 months,
and reduction to E-1. Sentence adjudged 30 April 2018 by GCM con-
vened at Scott Air Force Base, Illinois.
For Appellant: Captain David A. Schiavone, USAF.
For Appellee: Lieutenant Colonel Joseph J. Kubler, USAF; Mary Ellen
Payne, Esquire.
Before JOHNSON, DENNIS, and LEWIS, 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    This is an unpublished opinion and, as such, does not serve as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
59(a) and 66(c), Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. §§ 859(a), 866(c)
(2016).
                     United States v. Crowe, No. ACM 39519

Accordingly, the approved findings and sentence are AFFIRMED. *

                       FOR THE COURT

                       CAROL K. JOYCE
                       Clerk of the Court

*We note an error in the promulgating order. Specification 3 of the Charge should list
that Appellant committed the offense with an intent to gratify his sexual “desires” vice
the word “desire.” We direct the publication of a corrected court-martial order to rem-
edy the error.

                                           2