United States v. Private E2 THOMAS J. WATFORD
ARMY 20150549
| A.C.C.A. | Jan 30, 2017Background
- Appellant (Pvt. E2 Thomas J. Watford) pleaded guilty at a general court-martial to receiving child pornography and to enticing a minor to produce visual depictions of sexually explicit conduct; convictions were under Article 134, UCMJ.
- One specification (enticing a minor) incorrectly cited 18 U.S.C. § 2251A (selling/buying children) instead of 18 U.S.C. § 2251(a) (sexually exploiting minors to produce visual depictions).
- The military judge accepted appellant’s guilty plea; the convening authority approved a sentence including a bad-conduct discharge and 12 months confinement (with 30 days credited).
- Appellant raised an assignment of error alleging unreasonable multiplication of charges (rejected) and, via appellate counsel, challenged the mis-cited statute as fatally defective.
- The government characterized the mis-citation as a scrivener’s error and pointed to the record (arraignment, stipulation of fact, Care inquiry) showing intent to charge under § 2251(a) and appellant’s knowing plea to that offense.
- The court considered whether the specification, despite citing the wrong statute, sufficiently alleged the elements of § 2251(a) and apprised appellant of the charge.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Specification 2 fails to state an offense because it cites 18 U.S.C. § 2251A instead of § 2251(a) | Gov: Mis-citation is a scrivener’s error; the specification and record allege elements of § 2251(a) and appellant understood the charge | Watford: Incorrect statutory citation renders the specification fatally defective | Court affirmed the finding; specification pleaded elements of § 2251(a) and the record shows appellant knowingly pleaded guilty to that offense |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Sell, 11 C.M.R. 202 (1953) (formal defects that are not prejudicial may be disregarded; indictment sufficiency focuses on elements and notice)
- United States v. Care, 40 C.M.R. 247 (1969) (requirements for inquiry into guilty plea to ensure plea is knowing and voluntary)
- United States v. Schweitzer, 68 M.J. 133 (C.A.A.F. 2009) (standard rejecting unreasonable multiplication of charges claim)
- United States v. Grostefon, 12 M.J. 431 (C.M.A. 1982) (procedures for considering appellant’s post-trial submissions)