              U NITED S TATES AIR F ORCE
             C OURT OF C RIMINAL APPEALS
                          ________________________

                              No. ACM S32452
                          ________________________

                            UNITED STATES
                                Appellee
                                      v.
                        Daniel S. ELMBLAD
             Senior Airman (E-4), U.S. Air Force, Appellant
                          ________________________

        Appeal from the United States Air Force Trial Judiciary
                        Decided 7 September 2017
                          ________________________

Military Judge: Mark F. Rosenow.
Approved sentence: Bad-conduct discharge, confinement for 90 days, for-
feiture of $1,066.00 pay per month for 4 months, and reduction to E-1.
Sentence adjudged 18 January 2017 by SpCM convened at Cannon Air
Force Base, New Mexico.
For Appellant: Major Rebecca J. Otey, USAF.
Before MAYBERRY, JOHNSON, and MINK, Appellate Military Judges.
                          ________________________

    This is an unpublished opinion and, as such, does not serve as
    precedent under AFCCA Rule of Practice and Procedure 18.4.
                       ________________________


PER CURIAM:
    The approved findings and sentence are correct in law and fact, and no er-
ror materially prejudicial to Appellant’s substantial rights occurred. Articles
                   United States v. Elmblad, No. ACM S32452


59(a) and 66(c), Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. §§ 859(a), 866(c).
Accordingly, the approved findings and sentence are AFFIRMED. *


                   FOR THE COURT



                   KURT J. BRUBAKER
                   Clerk of the Court




* Although Appellant raises no specific assignments of error, we note the staff judge
advocate’s recommendation (SJAR) erroneously advised the convening authority that
the maximum sentence that could be imposed by this special court-martial included,
inter alia, a fine in addition to forfeiture of two-thirds pay per month for 12 months.
See Rule for Courts-Martial (R.C.M.) 201(f)(2)(B)(i); R.C.M. 1003(b)(3); United States
v. Books, No. ACM S32369, 2017 CCA LEXIS 226, at *7 (A.F. Ct. Crim. App. 31 Mar.
2017) (unpub. op.). However, under the facts of this case we find no colorable showing
of possible prejudice and, therefore, we affirm. See United States v. Scalo, 60 M.J. 435,
436–37 (C.A.A.F. 2005) (citations omitted).


                                           2
