United States v. Atkinson
2015 CCA LEXIS 110
| N.M.C.C.A. | 2015Background
- Atkinson pleaded guilty at a special court-martial to unauthorized absence and larceny (Articles 86 and 121); sentenced to 6 months confinement, $501 fine, and a bad-conduct discharge (CA approved).
- He had earlier been charged in May 2012 for related offenses but those charges were withdrawn; he absented himself 2 July 2012 and was declared a deserter.
- Apprehended on 27 May 2013 and held at New Hanover Detention Facility (NHDF) — a civilian jail — for 62 days; no R.C.M. 305 review of that confinement occurred.
- Upon return (27 July 2013) he received NJP for the long UA (60 days restriction, suspended forfeitures); he did not appeal NJP.
- New charges (the ones tried) were preferred in April 2014 and did not include the 2 July 2012–27 May 2013 UA period; Atkinson sought pretrial-confinement credit for the NHDF time at trial, arguing multiple bases for extra credit.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Entitlement to day-for-day credit for NHDF confinement under Allen | Allen requires day-for-day credit for pretrial confinement in civilian custody | Government relied on current DoDI/DoD rules limiting credit for non-military facility confinement unrelated to charged offenses | Denied — Allen inapplicable; current DoDI 1325.07/DoD 1325.7-M preclude credit for non-military confinement when unrelated to the court-martial offenses |
| Authority to obtain administrative relief under R.C.M. 305 for NHDF confinement | Atkinson sought R.C.M. 305 review and administrative credit for allegedly improper confinement | Government argued confinement was for deserter warrant/unrelated conduct and the charged offenses were separate; NJP adjudication covered the UA misconduct | Denied — military judge lacked authority because NHDF confinement related to separate UA misconduct not referred to trial; R.C.M. 305 relief unavailable for unrelated confinement |
| Whether Article 12 or other constitutional protections required additional credit for confinement with foreign nationals | Atkinson claimed confinement conditions (association with foreign nationals) warranted increased credit | Government did not link NHDF confinement/conditions to the charges adjudicated at court-martial | Denied — no jurisdiction to remedy unrelated confinement conditions at this court-martial |
| Whether confinement was unlawful pretrial punishment meriting extra credit | Atkinson argued confinement was punitive/unnecessarily rigorous warranting enhanced credit | Government noted multiple available nonjudicial/administrative remedies and that unit considered NHDF time in NJP and sentencing | Denied — even if Government mishandled NHDF confinement, the court-martial lacked authority to grant relief; the NHDF time was considered in NJP and sentencing already |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Allen, 17 M.J. 126 (C.M.A. 1984) (applied an earlier DoD instruction to allow federal-style pretrial credit)
- United States v. Smith, 56 M.J. 290 (C.A.A.F. 2002) (standard for de novo review of entitlement to pretrial confinement credit)
- United States v. King, 61 M.J. 225 (C.A.A.F. 2005) (appellate deference to military judge fact findings)
- Weiss v. United States, 510 U.S. 163 (1994) (military judges act only with authority of the court-martial to which they are detailed)
- United States v. Bailey, 68 M.J. 409 (C.A.A.F. 2009) (addressing legal effect of execution of certain punishments by the convening authority)