Washington, DC
Military law Lawyer at Washington, DC
Practice Areas: Military Law, Administrative Law
OUTCOME: Honorable discharge
Representing a client on appeal we convinced the appeals court to order an evidentiary hearing to determine if his trial defense counsel were ineffective. The hearing judge said yes they were ineffect ... ive. The appeals court reversed the conviction in an (unusual) summary disposition. After more effort the client has now received his honorable discharge after the prosecution was convinced not to hold a retrial.
OUTCOME: Reversed on appeal.
Client was convicted of various sex offenses. We proved, at an evidentiary hearing, that the trial defense counsel had been ineffective. The Army Court of Criminal Appeals set-aside the findings and ... sentence. A retrial was not ordered. Recently the client received his back-pay.
OUTCOME: Full acquittal
In June 2013, the client called because he was in trouble with accusations of sexually assaulting patients. He called us before he'd been called into the MCIO interrogation, so he remained silent. As t ... he investigation developed into accusations by seven different patients, the client ended up, in January 2014, arraigned for alleged sexual assaults of five. Shortly before trial, one allegation was dismissed, and a second was dismissed the day of trial. In September 2014, after trial, the client was convicted of one sexual assault, not guilty of two others, and sentenced to a punitive discharge. After trial, the judge dismissed the charge, and the prosecution appealed. The appeal went to the Army Court of Criminal Appeals and then to the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces. The military courts ruled in the prosecution's favor and said the judge was wrong to dismiss the charge. We petitioned the U. S. Supreme Court, but they denied our petition. Now we were back to the regular--normal--appeal process for anyone convicted and sentenced to a year in jail and/or a punitive discharge. We alleged the client had not received a fair trial because the jury had convicted him based on not wanting the Army to look bad in a sexual assault case if they found him not guilty. The Army Court of Criminal Appeals ordered a Dubay fact-finding hearing. In 2017 we went to Fort Leavenworth with a new judge for the hearing. Based on the findings of the military judge's facts and conclusions, the Army Court of Criminal Appeals, in February 2018, agreed there was not a fair trial and reversed the findings of guilt and the sentence. In October 2018, we went to Fort Sill, OK, for the retrial by a panel of members (a jury) again. The jury found the client Not Guilty. The odyssey is over--on the criminal front. One piece of excellent news is that he will be permanently removed from the sex offender registry. Now he can get a job, and his wife and daughter don't have to deal with neighbors who know they live with a sex offender.
OUTCOME: Charges dismissed.
Client was a Reserve officer who was recalled to active duty for disciplinary actions. He was accused of sexual abuse of his adopted daughter over a period of years. At the Article 32, UCMJ, preliminar ... y hearing we were able to convince the PHO that there were serious questions of jurisdiction based on the alleged dates and places of the alleged misconduct. Ultimately, the PHO recommended only one set of acts which were alleged during a time when the client was proven to be on extended active duty orders, and that the remainder be dismissed. Regardless, all charges were referred to trial (an example of the normal process where a PHO recommendations are ignored). The client was arraigned, and then strangely, the charges were dismissed two weeks later. So at this point the Commonwealth of Virginia had declined to prosecute and the Service had dismissed the charges. As was anticipated, the allegations were referred for disposition at a Board of Inquiry. Despite evidence of untruths and motives to lie the Board found misconduct and recommended an involuntary retirement in the next inferior grade. While not a registered sex offender who will get an O-4 retirement check, the stain remains. A difficult reminder of the very low standard of proof at a BOI, the limitations on discovery and access to experts, and the 'no rules' of evidence effect.
OUTCOME: Charges dismissed
Client was accused of sexually assaulting spouses. We worked hard to present a case at the Article 32, UCMJ, preliminary hearing. The hearing officer recommended no probable cause, and the convening ... authority agreed. -- Lesson, Congress gutted the Article 32 as an effective process. But, there are some cases where you can make a difference with prepared case.
OUTCOME: Reversal on appeal
Appellate client convicted of various sexual assaults. On appeal we raised ineffective assistance of defense counsel at trial. The Court set aside the convictions in a summary reversal.
OUTCOME: Acquittal on contested charges
Accused of multiple spousal rapes and assault, and other charges. Entered mixed pleas. Found NOT guilty of the sexual assaults. Was adjudged a dismissal and total forfeitures of pay.
OUTCOME: Mixed findings
Airman accused of 2 specs. of sexual assault, cocaine use, and 2 spec. of assault and battery. Only found guilty of the cocaine use and the 2 assaults and battery.
OUTCOME: Mixed findings
Officer accused of sexual assault, 3 specifications of sexual harassment, & 3 specifications of unauthorized badges and tabs. Found guilty only of 1 specification of sexual harassment and the unauthor ... ized badges and tabs.
OUTCOME: Not Guilty
Accused of submitting fraudulent claim for a DITY move.
Ad
Transform legal challenges into solutions.
Connect now to review your situation.
