This Just In: United States v. Grafton
C.A.A.F. affirmed the findings but held the Navy-Marine Corps court could not impose a sentence in the first instance, set aside the sentence, and authorized a sentencing hearing.
October 25, 2026 · 7 min read
C.A.A.F. — decided 17 September 2026 — Judge Sparks, for a unanimous Court
A Navy petty officer third class was convicted by members of two specifications of sexual assault under Article 120, charged in the alternative out of a single incident in September 2022. Specification 1 alleged a sexual act without consent, under Article 120(b)(2)(A). Specification 2 alleged the same act committed when the complainant was incapable of consenting because she was impaired by alcohol, under Article 120(b)(3)(A). Because the two were charged in the alternative, the military judge conditionally dismissed Specification 2 and instructed the members that they were sentencing on Specification 1 only. The members adjudged a dishonorable discharge, eight years' confinement, total forfeitures and reduction to E-1.
Her law firm's website explains how C.A.A.F. separated consent from incapacity in United States v. Mendoza, the case behind Grafton's appeal.
More Episodes You Might Like
- S1 E49: Member Instructions Practice Points
- S1 E25: Alcohol & Memory Cross-Examination
- S3 E17: 2025 CAAF Year in Review, Part 7 of 7
Topics: Sexual Assault & Misconduct Allegations · CAAF & Military Appeals
Court-Martial Data and Trends
From public court-martial records: