Name: Roy C. Janniche
U.S. V. Janniche NMCCA 200000401
Conviction Date: June 1, 1999
Sentence adjudged 18 June 1999.
Decided 22 April 2004
Plea: Not Guilty
Charges: Indecent act upon a 4-year-old child
Military Branch: U.S. Navy
Listed In National Sex Offenders Registry? Yes, Indiana
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
Roy C. Janniche
Aviation Electrician's Mate Third Class (E-4), U.S. Navy
Convicted Sex Offender
Indecent Act Upon A 4-Year-Old Child
Contrary to his pleas, a general court-martial consisting of officer and enlisted members convicted the appellant of making a false official statement and committing an indecent act upon a child, in violation of Articles 107 and 134, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. §§ 907 and 934.
The members sentenced the appellant to confinement for one year, reduction to pay grade E-1, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and a dishonorable discharge. The convening authority approved the sentence, but deferred and suspended the adjudged forfeitures and deferred and waived the automatic forfeitures.
In that Aviation Electrician’s Mate Third Class Roy C. Janniche, U.S. Navy, Fighter Squadron ONE HUNDRED ONE, Naval Air Station, Oceana, Virginia Beach, Virginia, on active duty, did at or near Key West, Florida, on divers occasions, on or about 12 June 1998, commit an indecent act upon and with the body of [AS], a female under the age of 16 years, not the wife of the said Janniche, by licking in and around her naked buttocks with his tongue, and kissing in and around her naked buttocks with his mouth, with the intent to arouse, appeal to and gratify the lust, passion and sexual desires of the said Aviation Electrician’s Mate Third Class Roy C. Janniche, U.S. Navy.
Charge Sheet. The Government presented the testimony of the four-year old victim and substantial corroborating evidence. In addition, a partial written confession, penned in the appellant’s own hand, was admitted. In his confession, the appellant admitted kissing AS on her buttocks one time. However, he denied any sexual intent. He also denied any other incidents of sexual misconduct.
The members found the appellant guilty of the specification, except for the words, “licking in and around her naked buttocks with his tongue, and.” Of particular note, the members did not except the words, “on divers occasions.” Therefore, we might reasonably conclude that the members found that the appellant kissed her on the buttocks more than once. However, after scrutinizing of the entire record, we are convinced that the members intended to find the appellant guilty only of the single incident to which he confessed, not that he did so on divers occasions. We believe that the members inadvertently failed to except the language, “on divers occasions.” Accordingly, we will take appropriate corrective action in our decretal paragraph.
We have considered the appellant’s other argument that the evidence is insufficient to show that he acted with the requisite criminal intent in kissing the bare buttocks of AS. We conclude that the evidence is legally and factually sufficient as to that element and all other elements of the offense.lieve that the members inadvertently failed to except the language, “on divers occasions.” Accordingly, we will conclude that the evidence is legally and factually sufficient as to that element and all other elements of the offense.
The finding of guilty of the language “on divers occasions” in the Specification of Charge II is set aside. That portion of the Specification is dismissed. With that exception, the findings are affirmed.
