United States v. Rodgers, ACM 38832

Appellant (A1C Daniel J. Rodgers) pleaded guilty at a general court-martial to attempting to commit lewd acts upon a child under 16 (Specification 2), after a pretrial agreement: Specification 1 was to be withdrawn and the word "anus" struck from Spec. 2.
Pretrial agreement reduced maximum confinement exposure from 45 to 15 years; no sentence cap was imposed by the convening authority.
Appellant later filed an affidavit claiming trial defense counsel (Capt CG) ineffectively advised him the charge was a "misdemeanor," and that but for that advice he would not have pleaded guilty.
Trial counsel, both defense attorneys, and the record (military judge colloquy and written advisements) show Appellant was informed of maximum punishment (including 15 years, dishonorable discharge) and sex-offender registration consequences; Appellant acknowledged understanding those consequences in court and in his unsworn statement.
The convening authority-approved sentence: bad-conduct discharge, three months confinement, forfeitures, reduction to E-1. The court found no prejudice from the alleged advice and affirmed the findings and sentence, but ordered correction of the promulgating order to remove the erroneously included word "anus."

Issue	Appellant's Argument	Government's Argument	Held
Ineffective assistance of counsel for allegedly advising the offense was a "misdemeanor" and inducing a guilty plea	Capt CG told Rodgers the charge was a misdemeanor; but for that advice Rodgers would not have pleaded guilty	Counsel deny the characterization; the record shows Rodgers was properly advised of maximum punishment and sex-offender consequences; no prejudice	Denied — even assuming counsel misstated the term, Rodgers suffered no Strickland/Hill prejudice because he was fully informed of consequences and it was not rational to reject the pretrial agreement that reduced exposure by 30 years
Promulgating order error (word "anus" remained on published CMO)	Not argued as a relief issue but noted in record	Government agrees correction needed	Remedy ordered — direct completion of a corrected CMO removing the word "anus."

United States v. Grostefon, 12 M.J. 431 (C.M.A. 1982) (standard for raising issues on appeal from guilty plea)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (two-prong ineffective assistance test: deficient performance and prejudice)
Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52 (U.S. 1985) (prejudice standard for counsel errors in plea context)
United States v. Ginn, 47 M.J. 236 (C.A.A.F. 1997) (when additional factfinding is required on post-trial affidavits)
United States v. Tippit, 65 M.J. 69 (C.A.A.F. 2007) (prejudice must be serious enough to undermine confidence in outcome)