Case Information
*1 Before HARDING, SPERANZA, and HUYGEN, Appellate Military Judges.
________________________
This is an unpublished opinion and, as such, does not serve as precedent under AFCCA Rule of Practice and Procedure 18.4. ________________________
PER CURIAM:
The approved findings and sentence are correct in law and fact, and no er- ror materially prejudicial to Appellant’s substantial rights occurred. Articles
United States v. Kendall , No. ACM 39170
59(a) and 66(c), Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. §§ 859(a), 866(c). Accordingly, the approved findings and sentence are AFFIRMED . [*]
FOR THE COURT
KURT J. BRUBAKER
Clerk of the Court
[*] The adjudged sentence was confinement for 14 months, a bad-conduct discharge, and forfeiture of all pay and allowances. The staff judge advocate’s recommendation (SJAR) recommended, in accordance with the pretrial agreement (PTA), approving only “so much of the sentence as calls for 12 months confinement, bad conduct discharge, and forfeiture of all pay and allowances.” The addendum to the SJAR contained a sentence that the earlier recommendation remained unchanged, immediately followed by a rec- ommendation that the convening authority approve the findings and sentence “as ad- judged.” The SJAR was correct, and the convening authority approved the sentence as recommended by the SJAR and in accordance with the PTA to the benefit of Appellant. As a result, we are not requiring a correction of the addendum. 2