May 16th, 2026

No. 26-0154/NA. U.S. v. Ruben Cruz. CCA 202400211. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is granted on the following issues:
 
I.  Whether Appellant's plea was improvident based on a misunderstanding of the convening authority's options when acting upon Appellant's request to transfer to the Fleet Reserve.
 
II. Whether Appellant's trial defense counsel rendered ineffective assistance in advising Appellant on the request to transfer to the Fleet Reserve in connection with Appellant's plea agreement.
 
The decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals is set aside.
 
The record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy for remand to that court to obtain an affidavit from trial defense counsel that responds to Appellant's allegations that his plea was improvident and that his trial defense counsel rendered ineffective assistance. A hearing is authorized under Article 66(f)(3), Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), 10 U.S.C. § 866(f)(3) (2018), if the court determines it is necessary to further develop the record. The Court of Criminal Appeals shall then review the granted issues in light of the affidavit and any other relevant matters. Thereafter, Article 67, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 867 (2018), shall apply.

Appellant, a Sailor with almost 20 years of service, pleaded guilty to the distribution of the drugs to Ms. H and Ms. S, who were inmates at the Hampton Roads Regional Jail by mailing drugs to them, and to conspiring with Ms. H and Ms. S for them to distribute the drugs, that he mailed, to other inmates at the Hampton Roads Regional Jail.3 Ms. H, Appellant's then-girlfriend, and Ms. S asked Appellant on several occasions, via phone calls from jail, to purchase Suboxone strips.4 He then mailed those strips to Ms. H and Ms. S in jail, and after they received them, Ms. H and Ms. S would then sell and distribute the drugs to fellow inmates.
​. . . 
A military judge convicted Appellant, in accordance with his pleas, of one specification of conspiracy to distribute a controlled substance and one specification of wrongful distribution of a controlled substance in violation of Articles 81 and 112a, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).1 The military judge sentenced Appellant to reduction to the grade of E-1 and confinement for six months.

Appellant asserts the following assignments of error: (1) Appellant's plea was improvident due to a misunderstanding of a material term of the plea agreement, and (2) Appellant's trial defense counsel was ineffective for failing to investigate how the convening authority would endorse Appellant's Fleet Reserve transfer request while advising Appellant that his request was "not in the realm" of getting disapproved by the Secretary of the Navy (SECNAV), which adversely affected Appellant's decision to plead guilty. We find no prejudicial error and affirm.

United States v. Cruz, No. 202400211, 2026 CCA LEXIS 19, at *1-2 (N-M Ct. Crim. App. Jan. 20, 2026).