U NITED S TATES N AVY –M ARINE C ORPS
C OURT OF C RIMINAL A PPEALS
_________________________
No. 201600109
_________________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Appellee
v.
MARK A. TAMBURELLO
Staff Sergeant (E-6), U.S. Marine Corps
Appellant
_________________________
Appeal from the United States Navy-Marine Corps Trial Judiciary
Military Judge: Major Michael D. Zimmerman, USMC.
For Appellant: Major Benjamin A. Robles, USMC.
For Appellee: Lieutenant Taurean K. Brown, JAGC, USN; Major
Cory A. Carver, USMC.
_________________________
Decided 17 November 2016
_________________________
Before C AMPBELL , R UGH , and HUTCHISON, Appellate Military Judges
_________________________
This opinion does not serve as binding precedent, but may be cited
as persuasive authority under NMCCA Rule of Practice and
Procedure 18.2.
_________________________
PER CURIAM:
At a contested general court-martial, officer and enlisted members
convicted the appellant of a sexual assault in violation of Article 120,
Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 920 (2012). The members
sentenced the appellant to six months’ confinement, reduction to pay grade
E-1, and a dishonorable discharge. The convening authority approved the
sentence as adjudged.
In the sole assignment of error, the appellant avers that the military
judge erred in the findings instructions. Without objection at trial, the
military judge instructed the members, in part, “If, based on your
consideration of the evidence, you are firmly convinced that the accused is
guilty of the crime charged, you must find him guilty.” Record at 221, 548. We
found no error in the use of the same challenged reasonable doubt instruction
in United States v. Rendon, __ M.J. __, No. 201500408, 2016 CCA LEXIS 643,
at *26 (N-M. Ct. Crim. App. 1 Nov 2016), and in accordance with that
holding, we summarily reject the appellant’s assignment of error here. United
States v. Clifton, 35 M.J. 79 (C.M.A. 1992).
The findings and sentence are affirmed.
For the Court
R.H. TROIDL
Clerk of Court
2