United States v. Campbell
2012 CAAF LEXIS 239
C.A.A.F.2012Background
- Appellant convicted of false official statement, possession of controlled substances, and larceny related to medications from a Pyxis machine at Travis AFB.
- Three specifications allege unauthorized withdrawal and possession of Percocet and Vicodin on divers occasions.
- Defense challenged multiplicity and requested dismissal or merger for findings and sentencing.
- Military judge ruled offenses not multiplicious, but later merged for sentencing after findings.
- On appeal, issue is whether the merger for sentencing was proper and whether dismissal as a remedy was considered.
- Court affirms Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals; discusses Quiroz factors and distinction between multiplicity and unreasonable multiplication of charges.
- Record shows multiple alleged acts spanning weeks; government charged divers occasions to limit exposure.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the military judge abused discretion by not dismissing unreasonably multiplied offenses | Campbell argues unreasonable multiplication warranted dismissal | Campbell contends merger for sentencing was appropriate | No abuse; merger for sentencing upheld |
| Whether remedy of dismissal was considered or applicable | Campbell asserts Roderick dismissal was available | Government concedes judge considered; no dismissal needed | Judge considered and properly exercised discretion; dismissal not required |
| Whether merger for sentencing was proper under Quiroz factors | Campbell contends multiple offenses inflated punishment | Government asserts distinct criminal aims; no unreasonable multiplication | No abuse; Quiroz factors support sentencing merger as appropriate |
Key Cases Cited
- Quiroz, 55 M.J. 334 (C.A.A.F. 2001) (guides for determining unreasonable multiplication of charges)
- Roderick, 62 M.J. 425 (C.A.A.F. 2006) (remedy of dismissal available for unreasonable multiplication)
- Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299 (1932) (elements test for double jeopardy)
- Morrison, 41 M.J. 482 (C.A.A.F. 1995) (multiplicity for double jeopardy requires cumulative sentences unless Congress restricts)
- Teters, 37 M.J. 370 (C.A.A.F. 1993) (foundation for multiplicity in military law)