United States v. Finch
2014 CAAF LEXIS 243
| C.A.A.F. | 2014Background
- Finch pled guilty at a general court-martial to receiving/possessing (Spec. 1) and distributing (Spec. 2) visual depictions of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct, violating Article 134, UCMJ.
- Military judge advised the maximum possible sentence as 30 years; SJA and defense counsel agreed to that maximum during colloquy.
- CCA affirmed Finch’s findings and sentence; TJAG certified issues about providence of the guilty plea and maximum-confinement calculation.
- The government argued the offenses are analogous to 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(2) and (a)(5); the CCA based the 30-year maximum on those analogies.
- Beaty held virtual child pornography carried a four-month maximum; Leonard held possession/receipt of directly analogous offenses could be punished under U.S. Code, leading to a thirty-year framework for actual minors.
- Dissent argued the maximum depends on whether depictions are of actual minors or virtual ones, a distinction not resolved by the majority and creating constitutional concerns.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Maximum confinement calculation correct? | Finch | Finch | Yes; maximum correctly aligned with analogous U.S. Code offenses |
| Providence of guilty plea when judge erred on minor status? | Finch | Finch | Providence upheld; no substantial basis to reject plea |
| remedy if depictions were actual minors but judge misstated? | TJAG | Finch | Remedies discussed in certified issue; not necessary to resolve here |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Leonard, 64 M.J. 381 (C.A.A.F. 2007) (authorize punishment by directly analogous federal statute when elements align)
- United States v. Beaty, 70 M.J. 39 (C.A.A.F. 2011) (virtual child pornography limited to four months maximum)
- United States v. Inabinette, 66 M.J. 320 (C.A.A.F. 2008) (guilty-plea providence standard; would require substantial basis to challenge plea)
- United States v. Mason, 60 M.J. 15 (C.A.A.F. 2004) (virtual and actual child pornography can be prosecuted under Article 134 depending on facts)
- United States v. Finch, 73 M.J. 144 (C.A.A.F. 2014) (post-Beaty constraints and duty to distinguish actual vs. virtual imagery in penalties)