United States v. Newman

Summary

The United States Army Court of Military Review held that the appellant’s forgery conviction was not multiplicious for findings or sentencing with his larceny conviction. Applying the standards from United States v. Baker, the court concluded that the specifications did not allege that the forgery was the means by which the later larceny was committed, and that the offenses involved separate transactions. The court affirmed the findings and sentence.

Holdings

1. The forgery and larceny offenses are not multiplicious for findings because the specifications do not fairly embrace each other, and the burden is on defense counsel to raise multiplicity at trial.
2. The forgery and larceny offenses are separately punishable because they were separate steps in separate transactions.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the forgery offense is multiplicious for findings with the larceny offense when the specifications do not allege a direct relationship and the offenses occurred on different dates.

Disposition

affirmed