Courts-Martial Dropped in Five Straight Cases Defended by Attorney Richard V. Stevens

Due to the pace of our caseload this summer/fall/winter, I have been unable to keep up with updating the blog. Here is a blog post addressing my last five cases…

Recently, five straight clients defended by military law attorney Richard V. Stevens (Military Defense Law Offices of Richard V. Stevens, P.C.) who were facing trial by court-martial had their courts-martial dropped. The following blurbs address those cases:

A senior NCO (noncommissioned officer) facing court-martial for allegations of sexual misconduct, misuse of government equipment and reprisal termination of a subordinate had his court-martial case dropped completely after the Article 32 hearing was litigated. At the hotly contested hearing, the flaws in the government’s case were exposed and the case was dropped with no further adverse action taken.

A military officer facing court-martial allegations of violating sensitive and classified security protocols had his court-martial case dropped after the Article 32 hearing was litigated. The government chose to address the case administratively instead of take the case to trial as previously planned.

A senior NCO facing court-martial allegations of travel voucher fraud stemming from a period of active duty mobilization had his court-martial case dropped after the Article 32 hearing was litigated, and on the eve of trial. The government chose to address the case administratively instead of take the case to trial as previously planned.

A field grade officer facing court-martial allegations of travel voucher fraud stemming from a period of active duty mobilization had his court-martial case dropped after the Article 32 hearing was litigated, and on the eve of trial. The government chose to address the case administratively instead of take the case to trial as previously planned.

A client facing court-martial allegations of imposing improper discipline had his court-martial case dropped on the eve of trial. The government chose to address the case administratively instead of take the case to trial as previously planned.

A court-martial conviction in any of these cases would have resulted in a federal criminal record and could have resulted in a sentence including possible significant jail time and a punitive discharge. While these criminal cases were successfully defended, it is important to understand that every case has different facts, and success in previous cases does not guarantee success in any particular future case. No military lawyer or civilian defense lawyer, including those who specialize in military law, can guarantee the outcome of any military trial. For more information on the military justice system, please see our other blog posts.

By: Attorney Richard V. Stevens
Civilian criminal defense lawyer and military defense lawyer
Military Defense Law Offices of Richard V. Stevens, PC
http://www.militaryadvocate.com

Blog postscript: Attorney Frank Spinner and I (attorney Richard Stevens) are former active duty military lawyers (JAG). Our perspectives and advice, therefore, are based upon our experience as military defense lawyers and as civilian criminal defense lawyers practicing exclusively in the area of military law. This blog addresses issues in military law, military justice, military discipline, military defense, court-martial practice, the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) and other military and/or legal topics. Nothing posted in this blog should be substituted for legal advice in any particular case. If you seek legal advice for a particular case, please contact The Law Offices of Richard V. Stevens & The Law Office of Frank J. Spinner for a free consultation. Military defense law offices are located in Colorado Springs, Colorado. Military defense law practices are worldwide.