Attorney Matthew Scott James's Legal Cases

Criminal defense

United States v. E-5: Drug Use

Feb 14, 2013

OUTCOME: Not Guilty

My client tested positive for cocaine after a random drug test. When questioned, she told investigators she did not do cocaine and had no idea how it got into her system. We decided the best course of ... action was for her to get a hair test. Her hair test results were negative for all drugs. Before trial, the Government attempted to produce evidence staining my client’s character. They tried to introduce rumors and fabricated stories from her unit. Based on our defense motion to suppress, most of this evidence was kept out of the trial. During cross-examination, we revealed to the military jury members that the investigators had not followed up on my client’s statements in her interview. She had gone to a party the weekend before and had a lot of alcohol to drink. She wouldn’t have known if someone had put cocaine in her drink, accidentally or on purpose.

Criminal defense

United States v. E-6: Firearms, Theft, False Official Statements

Oct 05, 2012

OUTCOME: Charges dismissed for Article 15.

My client was an Air Force commando with a history of untreated PTSD. When local police responded to a domestic violence call, they found a wide range of guns and military equipment. Enlisting the hel ... p of the Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, they Government sought to build an airtight case against my client. They filed charges and assembled a court-martial. After a thorough investigation, we uncovered evidence about my client’s unit, and the terrible record keeping they did. The Government tried to remove me as the defense attorney without success. After laying out the unit lapses and my client’s history, I was able to sit down with the commanders to see what they wanted. My client had been a good combat troop. The Government lawyers told be there would be no deals without a bad conduct discharge, which would strip my client of nearly all of his veteran’s benefits. After negotiating with the commanders, we brokered a deal that worked for everyone.

Military law

NCO Discharge: Unfit for Duty

Sep 12, 2012

OUTCOME: Client retained in U.S. military.

My client was a hard working, well-respected member of his unit. However, he had trouble meeting fitness standards. After failing his fitness test, my client worked hard to lose weight and improve his ... physical fitness. Despite his efforts, he was tall with a large frame. After multiple fitness failures, the Government assembled a discharge board. My client worked hard and passed his fitness test. Nevertheless, the Government worked hard to separate him from the military. My client and I built a great package including over 50 letters of recommendation asking for him to remain in the Air Force. We managed to convince his old commander to testify by telephone. After speaking with his current commander, his current commander elected not to testify at the board.

Criminal defense

United States v. E-7: Violation of a Lawful Order

Jul 05, 2012

OUTCOME: Not Guilty

The Government charged my client with providing promotion test materials to a friend, TSgt P, and assembled a court-martial. As a veteran nearing retirement, even the loss of a single stripe could have ... caused the military to separate my client without any pay, retirement, or the medical benefits she had earned over her many years of dedicated service. The Government granted her friend immunity and forced her to testify against my client. There were a few problems with the case. First, the special investigators lied. They lied to the witnesses, and tried to trick my client into confessing. Second, TSgt P’s testimony on the stand was far different that SSgt W, who TSgt P had given testing materials to. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, we were able to win an important pretrial issues that excluded illegal evidence the Government wanted to use against my Client.

Criminal defense

United States v. E-6: Drug Use

Apr 27, 2012

OUTCOME: Not Guilty

My client came back from a deployment and tested positive for marijuana. This was a problem for my client because smoking marijuana carried a mandatory discharge in the Air Force, and my client did not ... use marijuana. The Government charged my client will illegal drug use and assembled a court-martial. Coordinating with Capt Doug Devore, we were able to prepare my client and his friends for their important testimony. My client and his friends smoked hand rolled cigarettes in Iraq— cigarettes that often tasted funny and had human hairs. The Government star expert agreed that some one smoking hash (which she admitted was common in the Middle East) could result in a positive result. Finally, my client took the stand and explained to the members that he had no idea how the drugs got into his system.

Criminal defense

United States v. E-3: Kidnapping, Assault & Battery

Apr 13, 2012

OUTCOME: Not guilty on contested charges. 3 months jail, NO punitive discharge.

My client was charged with violently attacking his wife. My client pled guilty to this and accepted his punishment. What my clienbt could not accept were the kidnapping charges the government added. At ... a pretrial motion, I was able to keep out evidence the police had gotten illegally. The police investigators didn’t even know if my client spoke English as a first language— as a native American, he had come from another world.

Criminal defense

United States v. E-4: Sexual Assault

Aug 31, 2011

OUTCOME: Case dismissed

Client's ex-girlfriend told investigators that Client had raped her. Client had a sterling military record. His commander felt his hands were tied and recommended a general court-martial. An in-depth i ... nvestigation by the defense revealed that the complaining witness was not being truthful. Her story changed and there was no evidence of sexual assault. There was evidence that she threatened to get him in trouble because she thought (incorrectly) that he had cheated on her. After a blistering examination at an Article 32 and receiving our defense motion regarding her lack of credibility, the complaining witness began to have second thoughts about going forward. After consulting with renowned expert Dr. Gabriel Holguin, the defense prepared for trial. The case was thrown out on a legal technicality. The Court of Appeals reversed and reinstated the charges. However, the complaining witness came clean and decided not to move forward.

Military law

0-3 Article 15: Assault and Battery

Jul 05, 2011

OUTCOME: Article 15 dismissed

My client was a ROTC instructor with a sterling records. She was well-liked, popular, and very strict with her students. When she yelled at one of her student, Cadet M, he accused her of grabbing him b ... y the throat. My client's commander immediately offered her an Article 15 with several sworn statements claiming she had grabbed Cadet M. An in depth defense investigation revealed that the cadet had a long history of disciplinary issues. Even worse, Cadet M called a meeting of other cadets and they shared stories about what happened. Every cadet except Cadet M admitted that they had not seen my client choke Cadet M. Another Cadet said he saw the whole thing, and there was no choking. My client and I assembled 60+ character letters on her behalf.

Criminal defense

United States v. E-3: Domestic Battery

Mar 18, 2011

OUTCOME: Not Guilty

The Government charged my client with assaulting his wife. His wife said it never happened. My client and his wife had gotten into an argument and she had called the police because my client was extrem ... ely angry. My cliuent told the police that nothing happened. His wife told the military that she had lied to the police. The Government assembled a court-martial. During pretrial motions, one of the civilian police officers who responded clearly lied on the stand. He described the house as a war zone, complete with a rack of fist sized holes and other wreckage. Everything he said was contradicted by full color photos. The Government almost lost the whole case on legal grounds during the trial. Only through last minute rushing and quick immunity from the General were they able to stay on track. At trial, we presented my client’s side of the story.

Matthew Scott James's Legal Cases (9)

United States v. E-5: Drug Use

United States v. E-6: Firearms, Theft, False Official Statements

NCO Discharge: Unfit for Duty

United States v. E-7: Violation of a Lawful Order

United States v. E-6: Drug Use

United States v. E-3: Kidnapping, Assault & Battery

United States v. E-4: Sexual Assault

0-3 Article 15: Assault and Battery

United States v. E-3: Domestic Battery