Search This Blog

Monday, December 26, 2022



Military Defense Lawyer (Former JAG Attorney) News:

Recently, a military noncommissioned officer defended by attorney Richard V. Stevens (Military Defense Law Offices of Richard V. Stevens, P.C.) had the alleged sexual assault case he faced dropped by the military before the court-martial trial began (UCMJ Article 120).

The military NCO client was accused of sexually assaulting a military acquaintance after a night of drinking.  The case was investigated by military law enforcement, and charges were preferred against the client and referred to trial by court-martial.  In fact, the trial was set to begin just a few weeks before the case was resolved. 

The government requested an experienced former military prosecutor to serve as the Article 32 Preliminary Hearing Officer (PHO) for the case.  The PHO recommended that the government drop the case, but the government rejected that recommendation and proceeded toward trial.  The defense filed multiple motions in the case, highlighting the complainant’s counterintuitive behavior, her credibility issues, and her clear motives to fabricate the allegations to attempt to shield herself from the personal and military career consequences of her misbehavior on the night at issue.  

Ultimately, just prior the beginning of the pretrial motion hearing, the complainant decided she would prefer an administrative outcome for the case, instead of a court-martial trial.  The client, therefore, submitted a request for an administrative alternative disposition, and that request was approved.  The charges and sexual assault case against the accused were dropped by the government in favor of the administrative resolution.

If the case had proceeded to trial, and if the client was convicted of the alleged sexual assault allegations, he faced a federal criminal record, dishonorable discharge, many years in prison, and sex offender registration.  The administrative resolution saved the client from all of those. 

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, particularly cases alleging rape or sexual assault in violation of UCMJ Article 120, see:

We offer free consultations for a case you may be involved in.  Just call us. (Free consultations are not free advice. Legal advice requires an attorney-client relationship.)

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.

Blog postscript: I (attorney Richard V. Stevens) am a former active duty military lawyer (JAG). My perspectives and advice, therefore, are based upon my experience as military defense lawyer and as a civilian criminal defense lawyer 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 for a free consultation. These military defense law offices are located in the Washington DC, Northern Virginia, Maryland, National Capital Region (NCR), but the military defense representation is worldwide – when necessary, the attorneys travel to wherever the client is stationed around the world.