CIVILIAN COURT-MARTIAL DEFENSE LAWYER: MILITARY DEFENSE LAW OFFICES OF RICHARD V. STEVENS: 2023

Friday, December 08, 2023

The Army reminds us that, at its core, the DoD goal is not a fair military justice system that counters the toxic political pressure and false narratives pushed by politicians, advocacy groups, military leaders, and the media. Oh, by the way, what this brave officer told to his subordinate defense counsel is 100% accurate and appropriate for his duty position at the time...

https://www.stripes.com/branches/army/2023-12-05/army-sexual-assault-prosecutor-fired-12269175.html

Saturday, August 12, 2023

CIVILIAN COURT-MARTIAL DEFENSE LAWYER: MILITARY OFFICER RETAINED IN BOARD OF INQUIRY (BOI)

Military Defense Lawyer (Former JAG Attorney) News:

Recently, a field grade, military officer defended by attorney Richard V. Stevens (Military Defense Law Offices of Richard V. Stevens, P.C.) was retained in a litigated Board of Inquiry (BOI) hearing. Because this case was administrative, we can only provide limited general information.

Our field grade officer client had established a spotless professional reputation and was slated for future command. But, he was served with notice to show cause for retention in the military based on the alleged sexual assault of a strange and troubled civilian. A BOI in the military is a litigated board hearing for an officer that addresses involuntary administrative discharge. In other words, it is a board hearing in which the board members determine if the officer will be kicked out of the military. Depending on the service branch, a hearing like this is called BOI, show cause, adsep, and/or officer elimination. If the officer is kicked out involuntarily at the board hearing, he will not receive his retirement and retired benefits. In addition, in a case like this, the likely discharge characterization would have been Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. So, the stakes are very high for the client.

A BOI hearing is a litigated administrative hearing that is similar in procedure to a trial, with fewer evidentiary rules. The burden of proof is preponderance of the evidence. These hearings include voir dire and challenges of the members, opening statements, presentation of evidence, questioning of witnesses, closing arguments, and the retention decision by the board members.

In this case, after presentation of both sides’ cases, including evidence that the complainant’s story made no sense and she had motives to fabricate, the board members concluded that the client did not commit the alleged misconduct – despite the government’s very low burden of proof. The officer was, therefore, retained in the military service.

While this administrative board hearing 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 administrative cases, see:

https://militaryadvocate.com/practice-areas/administrative-dischargeseparation/

https://militaryadvocate.com/practice-areas/article-15-njp-captains-mast-office-hours/

https://militaryadvocate.com/practice-areas/administrative-discipline-actions/

https://militaryadvocate.com/practice-areas/medical-de-credentialing/

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.

https://militaryadvocate.com/

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.

Saturday, July 22, 2023

CIVILIAN COURT-MARTIAL DEFENSE LAWYER: MILITARY OFFICER AND PILOT REPRESENTED BY ATTORNEY RICHARD V. STEVENS PREVAILS AT FLYING EVALUATION BOARD (F.E.B.)

Military Defense Lawyer (Former JAG Attorney) News:

Recently, another military officer and pilot defended by attorney Richard V. Stevens (Military Defense Law Offices of Richard V. Stevens, P.C.) prevailed in a litigated Flying Evaluation Board (F.E.B.) hearing.

An F.E.B. hearing is a formal military administrative hearing before fellow pilots in which the Board makes recommendations about whether the accused pilot should remain in aviation service, in what aircraft, and whether that pilot can continue to wear his/her wings. Based on that recommendation, the pilot could continue his military flying career, or he/she could face the loss of his/her flying career, his/her military career, and be involuntarily administratively discharged.

In this F.E.B. case, the defense called multiple witnesses and presented considerable evidence not only in support of the pilot, but addressing the unique circumstances of his situation. After closing arguments, the F.E.B. members delivered a unanimous recommendation in favor of the pilot continuing in military aviation service. Because an F.E.B. is a closed administrative hearing, specific details cannot be provided.

An F.E.B. is one of the unique military aviation boards that attorney Richard V. Stevens has extensive experience with. This includes Flying Evaluation Boards (F.E.B.), Field Naval Aviator Evaluation Boards (F.N.A.E.B.), Safety Investigation Boards (S.I.B.), Accident Investigation Boards (A.I.B.), and Command Directed Investigations (C.D.I. or AR 15-6).

While this military aviation case, and the military pilot, 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 or case.

For more information about the military justice system, particularly cases involving aviation issues and Flying Evaluation Boards, see:

https://militaryadvocate.com/practice-areas/flying-evaluation-board/

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.

https://militaryadvocate.com/

Tuesday, July 04, 2023

Happy Independence Day!

Happy 4^th of July to you and yours! Before the cookout and fireworks, please take a moment to give thanks for the brave men and women of our military, and their families, whose courage and sacrifice ensure our continued freedom. And, please recall the amazing story of how we won our independence, despite all odds! Happy Birthday America!

Friday, June 23, 2023

CIVILIAN COURT-MARTIAL DEFENSE LAWYER: SENIOR MILITARY OFFICER RETAINED IN BOARD OF INQUIRY (BOI)

Military Defense Lawyer (Former JAG Attorney) News:

Recently, a senior, field grade, military officer defended by attorney Richard V. Stevens (Military Defense Law Offices of Richard V. Stevens, P.C.) was retained in a litigated Board of Inquiry (BOI) hearing. Because this case was administrative, we can only provide limited general information.

Our senior officer client was months away from applying for retirement, but was served with notice to show cause for retention in the military based on alleged substandard performance and not being fit for duty. A BOI in the military is a litigated board hearing for an officer that addresses involuntary administrative discharge. In other words, it is a board hearing in which the board members determine if the officer will be kicked out of the military. Depending on the service branch, a hearing like this is called BOI, show cause, adsep, and/or officer elimination. If the officer is kicked out involuntarily at the board hearing, he will not receive his retirement and retired benefits. So, the stakes are very high for the client.

In this case, after presentation of both sides’ cases, the board members concluded that the officer should be retained in the military service, which will allow him to retire. While this administrative board hearing 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 administrative cases, see:

https://militaryadvocate.com/practice-areas/administrative-dischargeseparation/

https://militaryadvocate.com/practice-areas/article-15-njp-captains-mast-office-hours/

https://militaryadvocate.com/practice-areas/administrative-discipline-actions/

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

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.

https://militaryadvocate.com/

Monday, May 29, 2023

Reflection and Gratitude - Memorial Day 2023

We hope you and yours have a meaningful Memorial Day weekend.

Memorial Day was originally called Decoration Day - a day for remembrance of those Americans who have died in service to our great country.

In the midst of your other holiday activities, please take some time to reflect on the meaning of the holiday and say thanks for those brave Americans who made the ultimate sacrifice for our country, and the ideals we stand for!

Wednesday, May 24, 2023

CIVILIAN COURT-MARTIAL DEFENSE LAWYER: SUCCESSFUL DEFENSE IN TWO MILITARY ADMINISTRATIVE CASES

Military Defense Lawyer (Former JAG Attorney) News:

Recently, in two different administrative cases, military members defended by attorney Richard V. Stevens (Military Defense Law Offices of Richard V. Stevens, P.C.) achieved successful outcomes. Because both cases were administrative, we can only provide limited general information. Those two administrative cases are described below.

Military Officer Faced Involuntary Administrative Discharge.

In this military case, our officer client faced an involuntary administrative discharge board hearing (Board of Inquiry [BOI], Show Cause) alleging unfitness to continue military service. The defense submitted multiple responses rebutting these claims on behalf of the client. After an extended period, the General Officer convening authority withdrew the administrative discharge board notice.

Military Officer Faced Allegation of Professional Misconduct.

In this military case, our officer client was accused of professional misconduct affecting her professional license, and the military had reported this to her professional and state licensing boards. Based on the defense presentation and appeal, those reports were withdrawn.

While these two military administrative 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 or case.

For more information about the military justice system, particularly administrative cases, see:

https://militaryadvocate.com/practice-areas/administrative-dischargeseparation/

https://militaryadvocate.com/practice-areas/article-15-njp-captains-mast-office-hours/

https://militaryadvocate.com/practice-areas/administrative-discipline-actions/

https://militaryadvocate.com/practice-areas/medical-de-credentialing/

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.

https://militaryadvocate.com/

CIVILIAN COURT-MARTIAL DEFENSE LAWYER: CONVICTION SET ASIDE FOR SENIOR OFFICER WHO HAD BEEN CONVICTED OF ASSAULT (UCMJ ARTICLE 128)

Military Defense Lawyer (Former JAG Attorney) News:

Several years ago, attorney Richard V. Stevens (Military Defense Law Offices of Richard V. Stevens, P.C.) represented a senior military officer who was accused of multiple sexual assaults and physical assaults by his former wife – in the midst of a contentious divorce proceeding. The case went to a general court-martial trial in the military, and the senior officer was found not guilty of every alleged sexual assault and physical assault except for one, very minor, alleged physical assault that would be considered a “misdemeanor” offense in the civilian justice system.

The accused senior officer retired from the military after the case was over. During the post-trial processing of the case, however, the complainant admitted that the one minor physical assault that the senior officer was convicted of did not occur as she had testified that it did. A post-trial motion hearing was then held in which the complainant’s testimony was again taken and, based on the findings from that hearing, the conviction was set aside, thereby clearing the senior officer’s record.

While it was a very long and challenging road for the client, his record was cleared, which has particular benefits for his military retirement.

While this military court-martial and sexual assault 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, type "rape" or "sexual assault" into the search bar above the blog posts and see:

https://militaryadvocate.com/military-offenses/sex-crimes/

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.

https://militaryadvocate.com/

Tuesday, May 23, 2023

CIVILIAN COURT-MARTIAL DEFENSE LAWYER: SUCCESSFUL DEFENSE IN FIVE MILITARY SEXUAL ASSAULT CASES (UCMJ ARTICLE 120)

Military Defense Lawyer (Former JAG Attorney) News:

Recently, in five different cases in 2023, military members defended by attorney Richard V. Stevens (Military Defense Law Offices of Richard V. Stevens, P.C.) achieved successful outcomes in the military sexual assault cases they faced. Those five cases are described below.

Military Noncommissioned Officer (NCO) Faced Sexual Assault Court-Martial.

In this military sexual assault case, an NCO client faced a court-martial trial in which he was accused of sexual assault and sexual harassment by a fellow military NCO who had motives to lie to shield herself from the consequences of her own behavior with him. The case included two motion hearings, and a trial that lasted throughout the work week. During the trial, the complainant’s motives to lie, inconsistent story, and character for untruthfulness were exposed, particularly through her cross-examination on the witness stand. After very brief deliberation, the court members (military “jury”) returned a verdict of not guilty of all charges and specifications the client faced (full acquittal). Shortly thereafter, the military NCO client was returned to the status he previously held, and retired honorably from the military.

Military Junior Enlisted Member Faced Sexual Assault Court-Martial.

In this military sexual assault case, the junior enlisted client was accused of sexual assault by a fellow military member who he was at a holiday party with. The complainant claimed she drank too much, could not have consented, and did not consent. However, the complainant had multiple motives to lie and several different inconsistent versions of her story. Her inconsistent stories were revealed during the Article 32 preliminary hearing, and the issues with her story, her background, and the case were detailed in multiple pretrial motions. Ultimately, right before the motion hearing, the complainant supported an administrative outcome for the case, so she didn’t have to face exposure during the general court-martial trial. That administrative outcome was approved, and the court-martial case against the accused was dropped.

Military Officer Faced Sexual Assault Administrative Discharge Board Hearing.

In this military sexual assault case, an officer client faced sexual allegations made by a fellow military officer after drinking during a TDY. The complainant claimed she was too drunk to consent, and did not consent. However, it was very clear that she had motives to make false allegations to shield herself from the consequences of her own behavior with the accused, and she voiced these motives when she initially told her story. The complainant also had multiple inconsistent versions of her story. Shortly after making her allegations to military investigators, the complainant elected not to go forward with the case, but the military still proceeded with an involuntary administrative discharge board hearing (Board of Inquiry [BOI], Show Cause). In the hearing, which is similar to a trial, the defense exposed these issues with the complainant’s credibility and motives. Despite the low burden of proof for the government (preponderance of the evidence), the board members found that the client did not commit the alleged sexual assault, and they retained him in the military.

Military Officer Faced Sexual Assault Investigation.

In this military sexual assault case, a military officer client faced a sexual assault investigation that was initiated by a subordinate who was angry with the client, and seeking to derail the client’s career with false allegations. During the course of the investigation, the defense was in close, repeated contact with military investigators, including providing them with the identity of witnesses and evidence. Ultimately, the defense was able to present alibi evidence that showed it was impossible for the accused military officer to have committed the alleged offense, because he was not event present at that location or event when the offense allegedly occurred. The sexual assault case against the accused military officer was dropped, and the complainant faced discipline for his own behavior.

Military NCO Faced Sexual Assault Investigation.

In this final of the five recent military sexual assault cases, an NCO client faced a sexual assault investigation initiated by a family member who was angry at him. The complainant was shown to be a disturbed individual with past false allegations and recantations with law enforcement. Ultimately, the case against the NCO client was dropped, and his military record was cleared.

Had there been sex crime convictions in any of these military cases, the clients could have been sentenced to a punitive discharge, a lengthy term of confinement in prison (possibly decades) and, in addition, they would have been required to register as a sex offender. Military careers and retirements would be lost, and future employment, education, and social opportunities would be destroyed. Thankfully, the truth was exposed in these cases and the clients were spared this risk of devastation to their futures.

While these five military court-martial and sexual assault 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 or case.

https://militaryadvocate.com/military-offenses/sex-crimes/

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.

https://militaryadvocate.com/

Sunday, January 01, 2023

Civilian Court-Martial Defense Lawyer: End of Year Wrap-Up and Welcome to 2023

Military Defense Lawyer (Former JAG Attorney) News:

Another year has come to an end and it was another gratifying year of defending those who defend us! We sincerely thank our clients for allowing us the privilege of representing them and their families. Thank you all so much for your service and your sacrifice!

As former active duty military defense JAG lawyers, and now as civilian court-martial defense attorneys, we strive to help military members and their families during very difficult times. Therefore, we measure the term “success” by how well we were able to help our clients and their families with outcomes that positively resolve the military cases, allegations, adverse actions and investigations they faced – not by our financial bottom line.

Looking back on 2022, it was marked by positive outcomes and grateful clients – from court-martial trials dropped and won to successful appeals and responses to other military adverse actions and discipline. These outcomes are extremely gratifying for us. Some of the successes from this past year have been documented in our blog (when we have time to post updates).

Here are some links to blog posts describing the outcomes of some of my 2022 cases:

2022 Year-End Case Summaries:

Rape and Sexual Assault:

http://militaryadvocate.blogspot.com/2022/12/civilian-court-martial-defense-lawyer.html

Rape and Sexual Assault:

https://militaryadvocate.blogspot.com/2022/11/civilian-court-martial-defense-lawyer_13.html

Senior Officer Professional Misconduct:

https://militaryadvocate.blogspot.com/2022/11/civilian-court-martial-defense-lawyer.html

Senior Officer Professional Misconduct:

https://militaryadvocate.blogspot.com/2022/07/civilian-court-martial-defense-lawyer_9.html

Rape and Sexual Assault:

https://militaryadvocate.blogspot.com/2022/07/civilian-court-martial-defense-lawyer.html

Retired Senior Officer, Officer Grade Determination (OGD):

https://militaryadvocate.blogspot.com/2022/06/civilian-court-martial-defense-lawyer_95.html

Officer Professional Misconduct:

https://militaryadvocate.blogspot.com/2022/06/civilian-court-martial-defense-lawyer_12.html

Larceny (Alleged PCS Voucher Fraud):

https://militaryadvocate.blogspot.com/2022/06/civilian-court-martial-defense-lawyer_18.html

Two Rape and Sexual Assault Cases:

https://militaryadvocate.blogspot.com/2022/06/civilian-court-martial-defense-lawyer.html

We are very thankful for the successful outcomes we have been able to secure for our clients this past year. For ease of researching, here are links to my year-end blog posts, and case outcomes, from recent previous years:

2021 Cases:

https://militaryadvocate.blogspot.com/2022/01/civilian-court-martial-defense-lawyer.html

2011-2020 Cases:

http://militaryadvocate.blogspot.com/2021/01/civilian-court-martial-defense-lawyer_12.html

As we always caution, while the military court-martial trials and other military cases described in our blog posts were successfully defended against, it is important to understand that every case has different facts, evidence, and participants, and success in previous military courts-martial and military cases does not guarantee success in any particular future court-martial or military case. No military lawyer or civilian defense lawyer, including those who specialize in military law, can guarantee the outcome of any military case or military trial.

This past year, I defended, represented, advised, counseled or otherwise assisted clients and/or handled cases out of:

- Joint Base Lewis-McChord (Washington State)

- Joint Base San Antonio-Lackland (Texas)

- Fort Bragg (North Carolina)

- Fort Eustis (Virginia)

- Fort Carson (Colorado)

- Fort Hood (Texas)

- Fort Belvoir (National Capital Region)

- Fort Shafter (Hawaii)

- Camp Lejeune (North Carolina)

- Bethesda Naval Hospital (Maryland)

- Naval Air Station Pensacola (Florida)

- Naval Base San Diego (California)

- Pax River Naval Base (Virginia)

- Travis AFB (California)

- Vandenberg AFB (California)

- Seymour Johnson AFB (North Carolina)

- Cannon AFB (New Mexico)

- Laughlin AFB (Texas)

- Beale AFB (California)

- Osan AB (Korea)

- Mountain Home AFB (Idaho)

Some of the cases, allegations and military law issues I handled this past year included:

- Involuntary Manslaughter (UCMJ Article 119)

- Negligent Homicide (UCMJ Article 134)

- Rape, Sexual Assault, Sexual Misconduct (UCMJ Article 120)

- Aggravated Assault and Physical Assault and Battery (UCMJ Article 128)

- Larceny, Wrongful Appropriation, Contract Fraud, BAH Fraud, PCS Fraud, Travel Voucher Fraud (UCMJ Article 121)

- Insubordination, Failure to Obey Lawful Orders, & Dereliction of Duty (UCMJ Articles 91 & 92)

- Drug Offenses: Wrongful Use, Possession, Introduction, Distribution of Controlled Substances (UCMJ Article 112a)

- Child Physical and Sexual Abuse

- False Official Statement (UCMJ Article 107)

- COVID Vaccine Refusals

- Conduct Unbecoming an Officer and Gentleman (UCMJ Article 133)

- UCMJ Article 134 offenses including:

- Adultery

- Fraternization

- Sexual Harassment

- Receipt, possession and/or distribution of child pornography

- Obstruction of Justice

- Wrongfully communicating a threat

- Wrongfully posting sexual pictures online

Some of the adverse actions I have defended against this past year have included:

- Court-martial trials and court-martial clemency (general court-martial and special court-martial)

- Administrative discharge boards, administrative separation boards (ADSEP)

- Officer Elimination Actions, Board of Inquiry (BOI), Show Cause actions

- Senior Officer Investigations and Discipline

- Officer Grade Determination (OGD)

- Article 15, Nonjudicial Punishment (NJP)

- Performance report appeals (OER, NCOER, OPR, EPR)

- Board for Corrections of Military Records (BCMR) (BCNR) appeals in different military branches

- Discharge Review Board (DRB) appeals in different military branches

- Medical De-Credentialing, Privileging Actions

- Flying Evaluation Boards (FEB)

- Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests

- Military Academy discipline, disenrollment, boards, and appeals

Given the potential consequences to military careers, families and personal freedom when facing military discipline, adverse action and/or court-martial trial, it is critical to be defended by a lawyer with experience in military law. For those seeking assistance, we offer free initial case consultations.

Please contact us by:

Toll Free Phone: (888) 399-0693

E-mail: militarylawfirm@gmail.com

Website: www.militaryadvocate.com

Attorneys:

http://militaryadvocate.com/about-us/

In the News:

http://militaryadvocate.com/Appearances/

Recent Reviews:

http://www.avvo.com/attorneys/32566-fl-richard-stevens-693212/reviews.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