United States v. EATON IV
CourtNavy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals
Date FiledAugust 31, 2026
Docket202600114
StatusPublished
📰 News Coverage: Read the LAWS.com news report on this case
Full Opinion
This opinion is subject to administrative correction before final disposition.
Before
de GROOT, MOSLEY, and HARRIS
Appellate Military Judges
_________________________
UNITED STATES
Appellee
v.
John G. EATON IV
Sergeant (E-5), U.S. Marine Corps
Appellant
No. 202600114
_________________________
Decided: 31 August 2026
Appeal from the United States Navy-Marine Corps Trial Judiciary
Military Judge:
Gable F. Hackman
Sentence adjudged 19 December 2025 by a general court-martial tried
at Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, consisting of a
military judge sitting alone. Sentence in the Entry of Judgment: reduc-
tion to E-1, confinement for 18 months, and a bad-conduct discharge.
For Appellant:
Lieutenant Commander Meggie C. Kane-Cruz, JAGC, USN
United States v. Eaton IV, NMCCA No. 202600114
Opinion of the Court
_________________________
This opinion does not serve as binding precedent under
NMCCA Rule of Appellate Procedure 30.2(a).
_________________________
PER CURIAM:
After careful consideration of the record, submitted without assignment of
error,1 we have determined that the findings are correct in law, the sentence is
correct in law and fact, and no error materially prejudicial to Appellant’s sub-
stantial rights occurred.2
The findings and sentence are AFFIRMED.
FOR THE COURT:
MARK K. JAMISON
Clerk of Court
1 Although not raised by Appellant, we note that the convening authority failed to
include a reason for denying Appellant’s deferment request. See United States v. Sloan,
35 M.J. 4, 7 (C.M.A. 1992) (holding that the convening authority’s decision on a deferral
request must include the reasons upon which the action is based in order to facilitate
judicial review), overruled on other grounds by United States v. Dinger, 77 M.J. 447,
453–54 (C.A.A.F. 2018); see also United States v. Riboni, 2022 CCA LEXIS 42 (N-M.
Ct. Crim. App. Jan. 20, 2022); Article 57(b), UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 857(b); R.C.M. 1103.
Appellant has not claimed any prejudice from this error, and we find none.
2 Articles 59 & 66, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. §§ 859, 866.
2