Argued on February 6, 2020.

Issues

:

I. To convict under Article 120c(a)(3), must the Government prove the attendant circumstances of both an indecent viewing under Article 120c(a)(1) and an indecent recording under Article 120c(a)(2)?

II. Whether one who causes another to deliver an indecent visual recording to oneself may providently plead guilty to distribution of that same indecent visual recording under Articles 77 and 120c(a)(3) in light of United States v. Hill, 25 M.J. 411 (C.M.A. 1988)?

III. Given the Government’s charging theory, were Appellant’s guilty pleas to Charge I, Specifications 2 and 3 provident when his alleged co-conspirator was not subject to the UCMJ?