Name: Juan J. Campos
Case: United States v. Juan J. Campos No. NMCCA 200602523
Date Of Conviction: 2005
Plea: Guilty
Charges: Possessing And Receiving Child Pornography
Military Branch: U.S. Navy
Listed In National Sex Offenders Registry? NO
A military judge sitting as a general court-martial convicted the appellant, consistent with his pleas, of possessing and receiving child pornography in violation of Article 134, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 934. The appellant was sentenced to confinement for 48 months, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, reduction to pay grade E-1, and a dishonorable discharge. The convening authority (CA) approved the sentence as adjudged.
We have carefully reviewed the record of trial, the appellant's seven assignments of error1 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. Arts. 59(a) and 66(c), UCMJ.
During the providence inquiry, the appellant admitted that on several occasions between August and September 2005, he solicited and received approximately 20 confirmed images of child pornography on his laptop computer through the internet. After receiving the images, the appellant downloaded them onto his laptop computer.
As part of a negotiated pretrial agreement (PTA), the appellant agreed to stipulate to the expected testimony of Dr. Dale Arnold, a psychologist and an expert on sex offenders and military sex offender treatment programs. Prosecution Exhibit 8. Dr. Arnold’s testimony expressly stated that he did not specifically examine or diagnose the appellant. His professional opinion involved his assessment of the general recidivism rate among sexual offenders and the requirements of Navy sex offender treatment programs.
The appellant correctly notes that the stipulated expected testimony included a statement that military sex offender programs normally require a minimum of 48 months to complete.2 Dr. Arnold’s expected testimony also informed the military judge that in the doctor’s professional opinion,, “[v]iewing child pornography predicted pedophilia better than a history of hands-on sexual offenses against children.” Id. at 3.
Conclusion:
With regard to the appellant’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, we specifically find that the appellant has failed to meet his burden to show that his defense counsel’s performance “fell below an objective standard of reasonableness.” United States v. States v. Edmond, 63 M.J. 343, 345 (C.A.A.F. 2006)(citing Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) and United States v. Davis, 60 M.J. 469, 473 (C.A.A.F. 2005)). We have considered the appellant’s remaining assignments of error and find that, in light of our holding related to the stipulation of expected testimony of Dr. Arnold, they have no merit. United States v. Reed, 54 M.J. 37, 42 (C.A.A.F. 2000)(citing United States v. Matias, 25 M.J. 356, 363 (C.M.A. 1987)).
Accordingly, we affirm the findings and the approved sentence.
Senior Judge GEISER and Judge COUCH concur.
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
Juan J. Campos
Seaman (E-3), U.S. Navy
Convicted Sex Offender
Possessing And Receiving Child Pornography
