Daniel W. Reeder
Personnelman First Class (E-6), U.S. Navy
Convicted Sex Offender
Possession Of Child Pornography
Name: Daniel W. Reeder
Case: United States v. Reeder No, NMCCA 9800702
Date Of Appeal: March 17, 2008
Plea: Not Guilty
Charges: possessing child pornography
Military Branch: U.S. Navy
Listed In National Sex Offenders Registry? NO
Sentence adjudged 27 April 2000. Military Judge: R.B. Wities. Review pursuant to Article 66(c), UCMJ, of Special Court-Martial convened by Commander, Amphibious Group Three, Naval Station, San Diego, CA.
The appellant was tried by a special court-martial composed of officer and enlisted members. Contrary to his plea, the appellant was convicted of wrongful possession of child pornography, in violation of Article 134, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C § 934, and 18 U.S.C. § 2252. The members sentenced the appellant to confinement for three months, forfeiture of $670.00 pay per month for three months, reduction to pay grade E-1, and a bad-conduct discharge. The convening authority disapproved the adjudged confinement, reduced the adjudged forfeitures to $600.00 pay per month for three months1
This case is before us a second time. On 15 October 1999, we set aside the appellant’s guilty pleas entered on two specifications alleging receipt and possession of child pornography and authorized a rehearing.
A Government witness testified that, while he and the appellant were watching a movie on board the ship, the appellant stated as to a certain female actress (believed by the witness to be 15 years old), that "she had nice t***, she had a nice a**, I’ll bet she’d be a great f***." Record at 335.
We note that Prosecution Exhibits 33 and 34 and Appellate Exhibit XV are missing from the record. These exhibits consisted of 3.5 inch floppy disks and a CD Rom disk containing images of child pornography seized from the appellant's computer.
We concluded that the record contained a substantial basis for rejecting the appellant's pleas based on the appellant’s assertion during the providence inquiry that he possessed the pornographic material at issue for "research" purposes. We determined that 18 U.S.C § 2252 is not a strict liability criminal statute, that a valid research purpose could raise a possible defense, and that the military judge failed to adequately resolve the defense before accepting the plea. United States v. Reeder, 1999 CCA LEXIS 274 (N.M.Ct.Crim.App. 15 October 1999).
We have carefully considered the record of trial on the rehearing, the appellant’s sole assignment of error, and the Government’s response. We conclude that the findings and sentence are correct in law and fact and that no error materially prejudicial to the substantial rights of the appellant was committed.
We affirm the findings as approved by the convening authority. We modify the convening authority’s action on the sentence as follows: Only so much of the sentence as provides for forfeiture of $600.00 pay per month for three months, reduction to pay grade E-1 and discharge from the Naval Service with a bad-conduct discharge is approved, and except for the bad-conduct discharge, will be executed. As modified, we affirm the approved sentence.
An Unofficial Site
Of United States Military
Sexual Offender
Conviction Records
Not Associated With The U.S. Military Or Government
An Unofficial Site
Of
United States Military
Sexual Offender
Conviction Records
Not Associated With The U.S. Military Or Government
