U NITED S TATES AIR F ORCE C OURT OF C RIMINAL APPEALS ________________________ No. ACM S32523 ________________________ UNITED STATES Appellee v. Cawahn D. BURRELL Airman Basic (E-1), U.S. Air Force, Appellant ________________________ Appeal from the United States Air Force Trial Judiciary Decided 12 September 2019 ________________________ Military Judge: Shelly W. Schools. Approved sentence: Bad-conduct discharge and confinement for 45 days. Sentence adjudged 6 March 2018 by SPCM convened at Holloman Air Force Base, New Mexico. For Appellant: Major Meghan R. Glines-Barney, USAF; Captain M. Dedra Campbell, USAF. For Appellee: Lieutenant Colonel Joseph J. Kubler, USAF; Major Thomas Franzinger, USAF; Mary Ellen Payne, Esquire. Before J. JOHNSON, KEY, and RAMÍREZ, Appellate Military Judges. Judge RAMÍREZ delivered the opinion of the court, in which Senior Judge J. JOHNSON and Judge KEY joined. ________________________ This is an unpublished opinion and, as such, does not serve as precedent under AFCCA Rule of Practice and Procedure 30.4. ________________________ RAMÍREZ, Judge: A special court-martial composed of a military judge convicted Appellant, in accordance with his pleas and pursuant to a pretrial agreement, of one charge and one specification of accessory after the fact in violation of Article United States v. Burrell, No. ACM S32523 78, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), 10 U.S.C. § 878; 1 one charge and three specifications of false official statement in violation of Article 107, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 907; and one charge and one specification of wrongful use of a con- trolled substance in violation of Article 112a, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 912a. The court-martial sentenced Appellant to a bad-conduct discharge and confinement for 45 days. The convening authority approved the sentence as adjudged. 2 Appellant raises two issues on appeal, but does so in the alternative: (1) whether the conditions of his post-trial confinement were cruel and unusual under the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution, 3 Article 55, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 855, and Article 58, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 858; or, alterna- tively, (2) that his post-trial conditions rendered his sentence inappropriately severe pursuant to United States v. Gay, 75 M.J. 264 (C.A.A.F. 2016). We find no error and affirm the findings and sentence. I. BACKGROUND In November 2017, Appellant’s friend, A1C DG, who was also a fellow ac- tive duty Air Force member at Holloman Air Force Base, New Mexico, went absent without leave while under criminal investigation by military authori- ties. Appellant had been with A1C DG the day before she absented herself, and Appellant knew she was absent without leave. In an effort to assist A1C DG in avoiding apprehension Appellant lied to his first sergeant and to an investiga- tor from security forces about his having had contact with A1C DG. Appellant then drove A1C DG from New Mexico to Colorado, then back to New Mexico, then to Texas, all while knowing she was absent without leave. Appellant con- tinued being untruthful to law enforcement when he lied to the investigation team from the Air Force Office of Special Investigations about ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals