Professional Documents
Culture Documents
v.
John C. ALSTON, Specialist
U.S. Army, Appellant
No. 10-0172
Crim. App. No. 20080504
United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces
Argued October 4, 2010
Decided November 19, 2010
EFFRON, C.J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which
BAKER, ERDMANN, STUCKY, and RYAN, JJ., joined.
Counsel
Military Judge:
John Saunders
The
United States v.
Alston, NO. ARMY 20080504, 2009 CCA LEXIS 439, 2009 WL 6832586
(A. Ct. Crim. App. Nov. 19, 2009) (unpublished).
On Appellants petition, we granted review of the following
issue:
WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE, OVER APPELLANTS
OBJECTION, ERRONEOUSLY INSTRUCTED THE PANEL THAT
AGGRAVATED SEXUAL ASSAULT WAS A LESSER INCLUDED
OFFENSE OF RAPE BY FORCE.
For the reasons set forth below, we hold that the military judge
properly instructed the panel with respect to the lesser
included offense.
BACKGROUND
remove PV2 Ts pants, and in response she stated that she did
not want her pants removed and attempted to resist.
Eventually,
fingers from her vagina and asked if she was going to cry.
When
PV2 T responded that she was not, Appellant hugged her and left
the room.
chain of command.
The defense, at trial, disputed the prosecutions view of
the evidence.
He
II.
DISCUSSION
In support of this
A similar
See Fed.
Id. at 718.
The
elements test does not require that the two offenses at issue
employ identical statutory language.
See United
Appellant
See
(1)
Article 120(t)(8).
The
Article 120(t)(5)(C).
DECISION