U.S. v. Harris, 78 M.J. 434

Trial Stages: Sentence and Punishment: Credits

1. the DoD Sentence Computation Manual provides that a military judge will direct credit for each day spent in pretrial confinement for crimes for which the prisoner was later convicted, but specifically precludes the award of pretrial confinement credit where a prisoner is confined in a non-military facility for a charge or offense for which the prisoner had been arrested after the commission of the offense for which the military sentence was imposed; in this case, the military judge’s factual finding that the 291-day period spent in pretrial confinement in a civilian facility in Florida was confinement for a civilian offense for which appellant was arrested after the commission of the offenses for which he was court-martialed was supported by the record, and consequently, appellant was not entitled to administrative credit for those days; although appellant had initially been arrested by civilian authorities in Florida for possession of child pornography charges, he was free on bond awaiting trial when he fled the jurisdiction and failed to appear at a pretrial hearing; when he returned to Florida, his bond was rescinded and he was placed in pretrial confinement for failure to appear at a hearing while on bail; ultimately, Florida elected not to prosecute the child pornography charges and appellant pleaded guilty to a single count of failure to appear; appellant was then court-martialed for desertion and possession of child pornography and pleaded guilty; the military judge did not err in denying him pretrial confinement credit for the time spent in the civilian confinement facility because appellant was confined in that facility for the offense of failure to appear, an offense for which he was arrested well after the offenses for which he was sentenced at his court-martial; dispositive in this case is the meaning of the DoD instruction’s phrase: “for a charge or offense for which the prisoner had been arrested after the commission of the offense for which the military sentence was imposed;” the correct meaning of the word “for” is closest to “because of” or “on account of;” it was perfectly accurate for the military judge to say that appellant was placed in pretrial confinement in Florida because he fled the jurisdiction and failed to appear at his hearing, not because he possessed child pornography, particularly where appellant was not confined for the child pornography charges prior to his fleeing the jurisdiction

Trial Stages: Appeals: Standards of Review, Burdens, etc.

1. an appellate court reviews the question whether an appellant is entitled to pretrial confinement credit de novo; the court will not set aside a military judge’s findings of fact unless they are clearly erroneous, but reviews the application of those facts to the law de novo; a military judge’s factual findings are clearly erroneous when there is no evidence in the record to support the finding or when, although there is evidence to support it, the reviewing court on the entire evidence is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed
2. when a term is not statutorily defined, an appellate court accords that term its ordinary meaning

Miscellaneous Matters: Statutes, Treaties, Regulations, Executive Orders, Directives, etc.: Generally

1. when a term is not statutorily defined, an appellate court accords that term its ordinary meaning