United States v. Passut
2014 CAAF LEXIS 27
| C.A.A.F. | 2014Background
- Appellant was convicted by general court-martial of multiple offenses including false official statements and forgery; sentence included bad-conduct discharge, confinement, and reduction.
- Air Force CCA dismissed two specifications and affirmed the remaining findings and sentence as reassessed; Passut, 72 M.J. 597 (A.F.Ct.Crim.App.2013).
- Issue granted: whether a statement to an AAFES employee for cashing a worthless check satisfies the official element of Article 107, UCMJ.
- Appellant claimed cashing a check is not a military function, asserting AAFES is not performing a military function under Article 107.
- The court analyzed whether AAFES’s function is military in nature and concluded AAFES performs a military function, making statements to its employees official.
- The decision affirms the CCA’s ruling that the AAFES employee cashing the check was performing a governmental/military function, thus official statements under Article 107.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does cashing a check at AAFES satisfy official status | Passut argues AAFES is not a military function; statements to its employees aren’t official. | Government contends AAFES is a military function; its employees are performing official duties. | Yes; AAFES is military function; statements were official |
| Abuse of discretion in plea acceptance | Passut contends plea lacks substantial basis given the law. | Government asserts plea supported by law and fact under established framework. | No abuse; plea supported by law and fact |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Spicer, 71 M.J. 470 (C.A.A.F.2013) (framework for identifying official statements under Article 107, UCMJ)
- United States v. Day, 66 M.J. 172 (C.A.A.F.2008) (statements to civilian firefighters can be official if related to official duties)
- United States v. Capel, 71 M.J. 485 (C.A.A.F.2013) (statements to civilian police officers not official when not tied to military duties)
- United States v. Ruiz, 54 M.J. 138 (C.A.A.F.2000) (AAFES store detective duties deemed military in nature)
- Quillen, 27 M.J. 312 (C.M.A.1988) (store detective at base exchange; duties deemed governmental in nature)
- Inabinette, 66 M.J. 320 (C.A.A.F.2008) (abuse of discretion standard for guilty-plea acceptance)