CIVILIAN COURT-MARTIAL DEFENSE LAWYER: MILITARY DEFENSE LAW OFFICES OF RICHARD V. STEVENS: 2015

Thursday, December 24, 2015

MERRY CHRISTMAS AND HAPPY HOLIDAYS!

Wednesday, December 23, 2015

CIVILIAN COURT-MARTIAL DEFENSE LAWYERS: The Latest News...

HERE IS AN UPDATE ON ONE OF OUR CLIENTS IN THE NEWS:

http://www.jqpublicblog.com/laughlin-pilots-cleared-to-fly-drug-reprimands-to-be-rescinded/

CIVILIAN COURT-MARTIAL DEFENSE LAWYERS: Military Non-Commissioned Officer (NCO) Found Not Guilty of All Charges and Specifications at Military Assault Court-Martial Trial (UCMJ Article 128)

Military Criminal Defense Lawyer (Former JAG Attorney) News:

Recently, a military non-commissioned officer (NCO) who faced a court-martial in which he was accused of assault consummated by battery ("domestic violence") and drunk and disorderly conduct was found not guilty of all charges and specifications at his military court-martial trial. The accused military member was defended by military law attorney Richard V. Stevens (Military Defense Law Offices of Richard V. Stevens, P.C.).

The military client was accused of domestic violence in two alleged incidents (Assault and Assault Consummated by Battery, UCMJ Article 128) and drunk and disorderly conduct (UCMJ Article 134) in an alleged separate event, but the accusations were not made by the alleged victim. During trial, the credibility of the witnesses who claimed the accused committed these offenses was challenged, both by pointing out memory and intoxication issues, but also by pointing out that the main accuser had a motive to make the false claims and to have associates of his join in the story. The main accuser had a serious feud with the accused, and had recently been arrested for assaulting the military client and the victim. When the accuser’s case was resolved in court, he then reported the claims against the military client in this case.

The military client pled not guilty in front of a military judge (as opposed to a military jury) and the military trial judge found the accused not guilty of all charges and specifications (full acquittal).

Had there been a conviction in the case, the military accused could have been sentenced to a bad conduct discharge, up to a year in prison, forfeitures of pay and allowances, and reduction in rank to E-1. Thankfully, that did not happen, the client’s record is clear, and he can return to his military career.

While this military court-martial case was 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 or case.

For more information about the military justice system, see:

http://militaryadvocate.com/military-offenses/

We offer free consultations for a case you may be involved in. Just call us.

Thank you.

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

Blog postscript: Attorney Frank J. Spinner and I (attorney Richard V. 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 and military justice. 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 and The Law Office of Frank J. Spinner for a free consultation. These military defense law offices are located in Northern Florida (Pensacola, Ft Walton, Destin, Eglin AFB, Hurlburt Field, Duke Field, Panama City, Tyndall AFB areas) and Colorado Springs, Colorado (FT Carson, Peterson AFB, Air Force Academy, Schriever AFB, Cheyenne Mountain Air Force Station, Buckley AFB areas), but our military defense law practices are worldwide – we travel to wherever our clients are stationed or serving and need us.

CIVILIAN COURT-MARTIAL DEFENSE LAWYERS: Possession of Child Pornography Court-Martial Case against Enlisted Military Member Dropped by Government (UCMJ Article 134)

Military Criminal Defense Lawyer (Former JAG Attorney) News:

Recently, a military enlisted member who was facing a general court-martial in which he was accused of accessing and possessing child pornography on his personal computer had his court-martial case dropped in favor of an administrative disposition. The accused military member was defended by military law attorney Richard V. Stevens (Military Defense Law Offices of Richard V. Stevens, P.C.).

The client was accused of accessing and possessing images of minors (defined as anyone under the age of 18 years old) engaged in sexual activity and indecent poses. This is commonly referred to as “child pornography.” As the defense investigated our case, we learned that there was a serious legal issue involving the interrogation of the accused and the subsequent search and seizure of his computer, phone, and personal data devices. After serving our pretrial motions on the government, which included a motion to suppress the statements and evidence, and just weeks before the general court-martial trial was scheduled to begin, the government elected to drop the court-martial case and military trial against the accused and, instead, to handle the case with administrative adverse action.

Because of the nature of administrative actions in the military, and the associated privacy protections, more information cannot be provided. Had this case gone to a general court-martial trial as originally scheduled, however, the maximum authorized punishment for a court-martial conviction on the allegations in this case would have included decades in prison, dishonorable discharge, reduction to E-1, total forfeitures of pay and allowances, and sex offender registration would have been required. Instead, the client can now press forward with his life without a federal criminal conviction and prison sentence in his past, and sex offender registration for the remainder of his life.

For more information about the military justice system, particularly cases alleging accessing, possession, distributing, or creating child pornography in violation of UCMJ Article 92 or Article 134, see:

http://militaryadvocate.com/military-computer-crime-defense-accessing-possessing-creating-transporting-distributing-transmitting-adult-or-child-pornography-on-government-or-personal-computers-ucmj-articles-92-and/

We offer free consultations for a case you may be involved in. Just call us.

Thank you.

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

CIVILIAN COURT-MARTIAL DEFENSE LAWYERS: Rape and Sexual Assault Court-Martial Case against Enlisted Military Member Dropped by Government (UCMJ Article 120)

Military Criminal Defense Lawyer (Former JAG Attorney) News:

Recently, a military enlisted member who was facing a general court-martial in which he was accused of rape and sexual assault by a civilian acquaintance had his court-martial case dropped. The accused military member was defended by military law attorney Richard V. Stevens (Military Defense Law Offices of Richard V. Stevens, P.C.).

The client was accused of rape and sexual assault by a civilian female acquaintance who had been drinking when they allegedly “hooked up.” Later, when she decided she wouldn’t have hooked up with the accused if she had been sober, she made allegations of lack of consent. However, during the ensuing investigation, statements by witnesses and discovery of evidence derailed the complainant’s claim, and the court-martial case against the accused was dropped. His record was cleared and he can now press forward with his military career.

Had this case gone to a general court-martial trial as originally intended by the government, the maximum authorized punishment for a court-martial conviction on the allegations in this case would have included life or decades in prison, dishonorable discharge, reduction to E-1, total forfeitures of pay and allowances, and sex offender registration would have been required.

For more information about the military justice system, particularly cases alleging rape and/or sexual assault in violation of UCMJ Article 120, type “rape” or “sexual assault” into the search bar above the blog posts. Also, see:

http://militaryadvocate.com/military-offenses/rape-sexual-assault-sodomy/

We offer free consultations for a case you may be involved in. Just call us.

Thank you.

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

Thursday, November 26, 2015

HAPPY THANKSGIVING!

Wishing you and yours a very Happy Thanksgiving! To all the American military families out there, particularly those separated from each other due to military service, a very special thank you. In the words of USMC Father Dennis Edward O'Brien:

---------------------------------------------------------|

THE SOLDIER

It is the soldier,
not the reporter,
who has given us freedom of the press.

It is the soldier,
not the poet,
who has given us freedom of speech.

It is the soldier,
not the campus organizer,
who has given us the freedom to demonstrate.

It is the soldier,
not the lawyer,
who has given us the right to a fair trial.

It is the soldier,
who salutes the flag,
who serves under the flag,
and whose coffin is draped by the flag,
who allows the protesters to burn the flag.

---------------------------------------------------------|

Pilgrim Edward Winslow describes the first Thanksgiving in 1621:

Our harvest being gotten in, our governor sent four men on fowling, that so we might after a special manner rejoice together after we had gathered the fruits of our labor. They four in one day killed as much fowl as, with a little help beside, served the company almost a week. At which time, amongst other recreations, we exercised our arms, many of the Indians coming amongst us, and among the rest their greatest king Massasoit, with some ninety men, whom for three days we entertained and feasted, and they went out and killed five deer, which we brought to the plantation and bestowed on our governor, and upon the captain and others. And although it be not always so plentiful as it was at this time with us, yet by the goodness of God, we are so far from want that we often wish you partakers of our plenty.

Wednesday, November 11, 2015

HAPPY VETERANS DAY!

Please take some time today to reflect on, and thank, those brave veterans who have served and protected our country in the past, those who are currently serving our country, and the families who support and share in their sacrifices for us. Have a wonderful and meaningful Veterans Day!

Tuesday, October 13, 2015

ACLU Files Lawsuit Against Former Air Force Psychologists Who Allegedly Helped Design CIA Terrorist Interrogation Program

According to various stories in the national press, the ACLU has filed a lawsuit on behalf of various foreign families against former Air Force psychologists who allegedly were involved in designing the CIA terrorist interrogation program that has been a matter of fierce political and public debate. Here is the CNN coverage:

http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/13/politics/lawsuit-cia-torture-black-sites-aclu/index.html

By: Attorney Richard V. Stevens

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

Thursday, October 08, 2015

The Ongoing Debate About the Ability of the Military Justice System to Handle Serious Criminal Allegations...

CIVILIAN COURT-MARTIAL DEFENSE LAWYER (Former JAG Attorney) NEWS:

As pointed out by a recent CAAFlog post, which will undoubtedly spark comments (stay tuned for that!), the debate continues regarding the ability of the military justice system to handle serious criminal allegations. Here is the CAAFlog post:

http://www.caaflog.com/2015/10/08/opposing-views-on-civilianizing-military-justice/

Here is one side of the debate, advocating civilianization of the system:

http://warontherocks.com/2015/10/sexual-assault-in-the-military-and-the-unlawful-command-influence-catch-22/

Here is the other side of the debate, advocating for the military justice system to continue handling these allegations - as authored by former USAF DJAG, Charles Dunlap:

http://warontherocks.com/2015/10/civilianizing-military-justice-sorry-it-cant-and-shouldnt-work/

http://militaryadvocate.com/military-offenses/rape-sexual-assault-sodomy/

We offer free consultations for a case you may be involved in. Just call us.

Thank you.

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

CIVILIAN COURT-MARTIAL DEFENSE LAWYERS: Military Officer Found Not Guilty of All Charges and Specifications at Military Sexual Assault Court-Martial Trial (UCMJ Article 120)

Military Criminal Defense Lawyer (Former JAG Attorney) News:

Recently, a military officer who faced a general court-martial (GCM) in which he was accused of sexual assault and abusive sexual contact of an acquaintance was found not guilty of all charges and specifications at his military court-martial trial. The accused military member was defended by military law attorney Richard V. Stevens (Military Defense Law Offices of Richard V. Stevens, P.C.).

The military officer was accused by a woman he met online and went on a trip with. Alcohol was involved, although the complainant denied that it had any impact on her or the case. The case involved numerous motions, experts in forensic psychology, DNA and forensic chemistry, forensic data extraction and analysis, and sexual assault examinations. The trial was litigated over five days in front of a military judge alone.

During the course of the trial, the defense exposed what we believed to be motives and significant inconsistencies in the story. The government’s DNA, serology, and chemistry experts did not find evidence that was truly consistent with the claim. The medical doctor who performed the sexual assault exam could not opine on the consent issue, however, serious inconsistencies in the story emerged from his experienced testimony. As with many cases these days, this case involved considerable text message evidence and testimony about lack of witness cooperation and evidence collection.

Ultimately, the defense argued that the case came down to the complainant’s credibility and reliability, and the accused client was found not guilty of all charges and specifications (full acquittal) by the military trial judge.

Had there been a conviction in the case, the military accused could have been sentenced to a dismissal (equivalent of dishonorable discharge), up to 74 years in prison, forfeitures of all pay and allowances and, in addition, he would have been required to register as a sex offender. Thankfully, that did not happen and he can return to his military career.

http://militaryadvocate.com/military-offenses/rape-sexual-assault-sodomy/

We offer free consultations for a case you may be involved in. Just call us.

Thank you.

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

Wednesday, October 07, 2015

CIVILIAN COURT-MARTIAL DEFENSE LAWYERS: Field Grade Officer Cleared of Sexual Assault Allegation (UCMJ Article 120)

Military Criminal Defense Lawyer (Former JAG Attorney) News:

Recently, a field grade military officer who was facing a sexual assault allegation was cleared after litigating an administrative disciplinary action (UCMJ Article 120). The accused military member was defended by military law attorney Richard V. Stevens (Military Defense Law Offices of Richard V. Stevens, P.C.).

This case was processed in a surprising manner given the environment in the military justice system, and the outcome – while entirely justified – was also surprising given the environment.

The military officer was accused of sexually assaulting a female he met through an online post. Initially, the investigation was headed toward a court-martial, as most, unfortunately, do these days. However, as doubts started to surface, the case was handled via administrative disciplinary action instead. Due to the environment in the military justice system, we had fears that the government’s strategy was to administratively discipline and discharge the officer, instead of court-martialing him, because the allegation wouldn’t hold up in a court and they could get rid of him expeditiously, and without the evidentiary standard of a military trial.

In response to the disciplinary action, the client pled not guilty in the administrative forum and we submitted a lengthy, detailed rebuttal. That rebuttal included what didn’t make sense about the complainant’s claims (to include evidence of her seeking to see the client romantically after the alleged sexual assault), as well as her admitted history of making a false police claim against another individual because she was upset at the person.

Ultimately, the General who heard the case found the client not guilty of the alleged sexual assault. Because of the not guilty finding, the client also avoided a discharge board hearing (a.k.a. show cause, board of inquiry, officer elimination) based on sexual assault. The client will now continue on with his military career.

For all the times I have blogged about how the military justice system is being held hostage by misguided politicians and advocacy groups who demand predetermined outcomes that support complainants and punish military accuseds – this case was a refreshing reminder that not all military commanders are willing to be pawns in the political game, and some are willing to make judgments based on their personal and professional conscience, regardless of the “noise” that could result by those who blindly disapprove of a result that doesn’t back up a sexual assault complainant.

Due to the nature of adverse administrative actions in the military, no further details about this case can be released. While this military disciplinary case was 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 or case.

For more information about the military justice system, particularly cases alleging rape and/or sexual assault in violation of UCMJ Article 120 or Article 125, type “rape” or “sexual assault” into the search bar above the blog posts. Also, see:

http://militaryadvocate.com/military-offenses/rape-sexual-assault-sodomy/

We offer free consultations for a case you may be involved in. Just call us.

Thank you.

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

Monday, September 21, 2015

CIVILIAN COURT-MARTIAL DEFENSE LAWYERS: Military Appellate Courts…“Yes, people can engage in consensual sex when drunk!”

CIVILIAN COURT-MARTIAL DEFENSE ATTORNEYS (Former JAG Lawyers) NEWS:

Another military sex assault post? Yes, I’m afraid so. For those of you who read my posts from time to time, I know that a vast number of them address allegations of rape and sexual assault in the military justice system. That just happens to be the reality of my legal practice, and the state of the military justice system.

I have been handling military justice cases on and off active duty since 1995. In that time, no broad topic has been as prominent in the system as rape and sexual assault. No category of clients is even close to the number of clients I’ve defended in the military who were accused of rape or sexual assault. No, that doesn’t mean there’s an epidemic of actual rape and sexual assault in the military, although there might be an “epidemic” of such allegations (irrespective of the merits of a large percentage of them).

Within the broad topic of military sexual assault cases, no subtopic has been as prominent as engaging in sex after drinking alcohol…and no issue has been as misunderstood and misstated. This issue reaches crescendos in the wake of scandals. Right after the Air Force Academy scandal in 2003, “drunk sex” was THE issue in military briefings and cases. Here, for example, is an article I wrote back in 2004 after having successfully defended the first litigated rape court-martial trial at the Air Force Academy post-scandal:

http://www.falserape.net/stevens_commentary.html

Likewise, after the 2011-2012 Lackland AFB MTI scandal (military training instructor) scandal, agenda-driven politicians and advocacy groups once again high jacked the public narrative about the military justice system (including completely inaccurate statements about the system and ill-advised systemic changes), and the military has once again overreacted, with mandatory sexual assault training and briefings; many of which are still legally inaccurate…even in 2015! There are still those who perpetuate the legally incorrect message that people can’t consent to sex if they have been drinking or are drunk. In fact, this message has included claims that as few as one drink renders people (particularly women) incapable of consenting to sex and not responsible for their own behavior or decisions.

The drunken hookup comedy movie “Knocked Up” is all of a sudden a rape movie, if we are to believe politicians, advocacy groups, and many military briefings. Absurd! There is a big difference between the law of consent and preferred social behavior. I’m not advocating that military members should “get drunk and screw” as Jimmy Buffet sang, but if they do, that’s not the definition of “rape,” although it may be a poor or regrettable personal choice.

One of the big problems is that this issue is one to be avoided if you’re in a position of authority, as any attempt to have a real conversation about it results in claims of “victim blaming.” Just consider, for example, how the Air Force Chief of Staff, General Mark Welsh, not only had to promise Congress that he would be tough on the issue of alleged sexual assault in order to be confirmed as Chief of Staff, but he had to go on a public apology tour for daring to mention the problem of the “hookup culture” among the young. Just Google “General Mark Welsh and Air Force and ‘hookup culture’” and you will be amazed by the vitriol. So much for an attempt to address the issues in a way that could suggest some level of participation or involvement by the other individual in an alleged drunk sex scenario. You must allege rape and presume guilt in these scenarios or you are a misogynist, a “victim blamer,” etc. etc.

But then there’s the LAW. And, the Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals has again reminded us that, according to the law:

drunk ≠ unable to consent

drunk sex ≠ per se rape

The latest appellate opinion appears here:

http://www.jag.navy.mil/courts/documents/archive/2015/PEASE-201400165-PUB.PDF

The only time alcohol intoxication renders a person unable to consent to sex is when the level of intoxication is SO HIGH that the person is either unconscious or the person “does not possess the cognitive ability to appreciate the sex act and does not possess the mental and physical ability to make and communicate a decision regarding that conduct to the other person.” In other words, it’s about the ABILITY to make and communicate a decision at the time of the sex, it’s NOT about whether that decision was a good one, a regrettable one, or even a different one than would have been made if the person was sober.

If the person recognizes at the time that she is having sex and she is able to communicate her decision to engage in the sex, albeit drunkenly, that is NOT sexual assault. It may be behavior that should be avoided. It may be behavior that causes regret, and guilt, and shame, and emotional upheaval…but, it is NOT rape or sexual assault. Until that legal concept is understood and disseminated throughout the military population, there will continue to be court-martial after court-martial and military conviction rate statistics that are deemed "unacceptable" by those who are determined to change, and destroy, the military justice system.

http://militaryadvocate.com/military-offenses/rape-sexual-assault-sodomy/

We offer free consultations for a case you may be involved in. Just call us.

Thank you.

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

Thursday, September 17, 2015

CIVILIAN COURT-MARTIAL DEFENSE LAWYERS: Article 32 Changes - "Alas Poor Truth, We Knew You" by Thomas Becker

CIVILIAN COURT-MARTIAL DEFENSE ATTORNEYS (Former JAG Lawyers) NEWS:

As you know, for years I have blogged about how misguided politicians and advocacy groups have set about to destroy the fairness of the military justice system, particularly in military cases alleging rape and sexual assault. Justice is not the interest that motivates these groups. They seek predetermined outcomes that favor conviction and harsh sentences. They presume guilt. They dominate the public discourse by propagating the false narrative that the military is suffering from a "rape epidemic" and the military justice system is "broken"...because these groups can't accept that justice statistics aren't completely one-sided.

You also know that the changes to military Article 32 hearings are a major part of this initiative to ensure predetermined outcomes in military justice cases.

The outgoing President, and Congress, hold a blade to the neck of military justice, as they continue to threaten more changes if they don't see "improvement." Improvement, of course, does not translate to fairness, it means just the opposite.

A very thoughtful article is included in the most recent edition of The Reporter, which is published by the Air Force JAG School. The article, which was authored by Mr. Thomas Becker, is titled "Alas, Poor Truth, We Knew You" and can be found on page 41 at this link:

http://www.afjag.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-150827-010.pdf

Those who advocated for the changes to Article 32 hearings, and who continue to argue these changes were warranted, claim this was merely to make the military justice system "more like civilian systems." This soundbite is such a fallacy, however, because it (intentionally) fails to make mention that while significant rights have been stripped from military members accused of crimes, none of the systemic protections enjoyed by civilians accused of crimes were incorporated into the military justice system to balance out the changes being made.

The military justice system is a federal criminal justice system. So, let's compare the newest iteration of the military justice system with its civilian counterpart in "felony" level cases:

FEDERAL SYSTEM	MILITARY SYSTEM

At indictment, the accused has met: 1. A binding initial appearance before a federal judge; 2. A binding preliminary hearing before a federal judge; and, 3. A grand jury.	At referral, the accused has met: 1. An advisory preliminary hearing before a hearing officer in which the defense no longer has discovery rights. *As described in the Becker article.
Law enforcement agents are not prohibited or discouraged from fully investigating both sides of a case.	Military law enforcement are discouraged and prohibited from investigating the background and credibility of a complaining witness.
Federal public defender does not have to ask permission to interview a complaining witness.	Defense has to ask permission to interview a complaining witness.
Federal public defender has their own investigators and experts on staff.	Defense has no investigators or experts on staff.
Federal public defender has their own money to employ additional defense experts for a case.	Defense has to request the government appoint and fund experts – which requests can be denied by the government.
Federal public defender can subpoena witnesses for trial.	Defense has to request the government produce witnesses to testify for the defense – which requests can be denied. Defense cannot subpoena witnesses.
Conviction in federal criminal court requires a unanimous jury.	Conviction in a military court requires 2/3 concurrence of as few as 5 court members in a GCM.
The President and Congress are not altering or threatening to change the federal criminal justice system based on “unacceptable” conviction rates.	The military justice system is being altered by the President and Congress, and threatened with more changes, if more prosecution “friendly” conviction rate statistics aren’t achieved.

The sad truth is that the disparity described above isn't accidental; it's what these agenda-driven politicians are seeking. Thank you, Mr. Becker, for being a voice on the other side of a very unbalanced narrative...

http://militaryadvocate.com/military-offenses/rape-sexual-assault-sodomy/

We offer free consultations for a case you may be involved in. Just call us.

Thank you.

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

Friday, September 11, 2015

NEVER FORGET

Friday, August 21, 2015

CIVILIAN COURT-MARTIAL DEFENSE LAWYERS: "Deeply Troubling Conduct" by Military Trial Counsel Regarding Discovery Obligations...Case Dismissed

MILITARY CRIMINAL DEFENSE LAWYER (Former JAG Attorney) NEWS:

The Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF) recently upheld an Army trial judge's dismissal - with prejudice - of a sexual assault court-martial due to repeated discovery violations by the military prosecutor. Here is an analysis of the case on the blog CAAFlog:

http://www.caaflog.com/2015/08/21/opinion-analysis-finding-deeply-troubling-conduct-by-trial-counsel-caaf-affirms-dismissal-with-prejudice-in-united-states-v-stellato-no-15-0315ar/

At this point over the years, I have posted countless stories about the military justice system and how misguided politicians and advocates are seeking to destroy the fairness of the system by making changes to the system, and threatening more changes, if "trends and statistics" don't change to their liking - meaning predetermined prosecution oriented outcomes in alleged rape and sexual assault cases (UCMJ Article 120).

In this oppressive environment, the defense relies, more than ever, on prosecutors and trial judges to be immune from this improper pressure and to ensure the military justice system is fair. In this Stellato case, it appears the military trial judge did just that, but trial counsel apparently wasn't equal to the task. I wonder what Sen Gillibrand, Sen McCaskill, Rep. Speier, and others who spew their ignorance about the military justice system would think about this appellate decision? Was this, in their eyes, a necessary and sound decision to uphold the integrity of a criminal justice system and the Constitutional rights of an accused...or is this one more indication the military system is "broken" because a defense motion was granted and this sexual assault case didn't result in conviction and harsh sentence?

We are practicing during a very dangerous chapter in the history of the military justice system...

http://militaryadvocate.com/military-offenses/rape-sexual-assault-sodomy/

We offer free consultations for a case you may be involved in. Just call us.

Thank you.

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