Grosty

I have commented before that an Appellant sometimes gets a grant on a Grostefon issue, and sometimes wins something.

Unfortunately for Cerion R. ALLEN, he got a Grosty grant, but the victory was Pyrrhic.

No. 14-0519/AR.  U.S. v. Cerion R. ALLEN.  CCA 20120742.  On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals, we agree with Appellant’s personally asserted contention that the facts established during the plea inquiry and in the stipulation of fact demonstrate only a single conspiracy.  Appellant was convicted of one conspiracy to commit robbery (Specification 2 of Charge II) and one conspiracy to commit burglary (Specification 3 of Charge II), but the plea inquiry and stipulation of fact show that there was only one agreement between Appellant and his co-conspirators to break into and rob the alleged drug house.  Therefore, Specification 3 of Charge II should be consolidated with Specification 2 of Charge II to become a single specification.  See United States v. Pereira, 53 M.J. 183 (C.A.A.F. 2000); United States v. Reliford, 27 M.J. 176 (C.M.A. 1988) (summary disposition).  Although the conspiracy offenses are consolidated, we are satisfied that Appellant suffered no prejudice as to his sentence.  Accordingly, it is ordered that said petition is granted on the following personally asserted issue[.]