Military service members that have been accused and charged with some sort of crime that will go to court-martial are given the option to use an appointed defense counsel, just as if they had been charged in civilian court. While this choice may seem tempting due to fact that there are no legal fees involved, it is generally not the best solution for someone who really wants to protect his or her rights as a military service member. Just as there are considerable downsides to using a public defender in the civilian court system, using a military appointed attorney can be quite disadvantageous.
An appointed military defense counselor might be:
- Inexperienced: Frequently the military attorneys who are appointed to represent service members pending court-martials have minimal litigation experience. You certainly do not want to be the first case that your defense attorney has ever taken to a jury trial. Likewise, if your case is going to involve negotiation of a plea agreement, you certainly want an attorney who is experienced in your corner to argue your position. Unquestionably, the government counsel is going to give heavy consideration to who the defense counsel is when determining what concessions to make in a plea agreement. When the case gets to trial, the inexperienced defense attorney will likely be reading from his/her notes during arguments to the court. Yes, this will not cost you a dime – but is this how you want to be defended?
- Impersonal: Due to the military relationship between the lawyer and client, which is frequently Officer – Enlisted, there is a natural tendency for the client to feel some hesitancy in the communications with the military lawyer which regrettably can adversely affect the ultimate outcome. It is essential that the attorney-client relationship be one in which trust flows both ways. Frequently we hear comments such as “My military lawyer gets paid by the Army, so he’s not going to help me. You have to be able to talk to your attorney and rank should not in any respect pay a factor!
- Limited in Support Staff: Typically the support staff available to the military defense attorneys is very limited at best. It is unlikely that there would ever be a paralegal specifically assigned to your case that you can contact and speak to as necessary.
- For these reasons and more, you will most likely benefit the most from hiring your own civilian attorney. But this raises the question, “How can you choose a good civilian attorney?”
Qualities in a Civilian Attorney to Look For
To begin, you are going to want to find a civilian attorney that focuses exclusively or near-exclusively on military law cases. Criminal defense experience is great but it isn’t exactly the same as a military defense case. There are plenty of stipulations, regulations, and so forth that make a military defense case unlike anything else in the country’s legal system.
Along these same lines, a civilian lawyer with military service experience is absolutely necessary to secure a proper defense in a court-martial. This inside perspective on not only how military law is formed but also why military court-martials rule the way they do is an insight that really cannot be replaced. Lastly, of course, you will want to work with someone who genuinely cares about the outcome of your case and your future as a proud member of the United States Armed Forces.
At McCormack & McCormack, Attorney Greg McCormack has over 38 years of military law experience, including a background as a former United States Army Judge Advocate General’s Corps member. Clients all across the nation and overseas know that the experience, know-how, and compassion provided by Greg McCormack is unparalleled. If you want to learn more about our law firm, or if you know you need our service right away for a military defense case of your own, do not hesitate to call to schedule a free initial consultation.
For those in the military, service can come at a tremendous cost. One study by the RAND corporation estimates that at least 20% of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans have post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) or severe depression. Other sources indicate that this percentage may be higher. Unfortunately, returning veterans are not always able to get the medical care that they have worked hard for and deserve. However, a new bill seeks to offer veterans better protections.
The recently introduced legislation aims to better protect returning veterans by ending the practice of bestowing less-than-honorable discharges on soldiers who have post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) or who have suffered a traumatic brain injury (TBI). The bill is backed by both Democrats and Republicans who have previously served in Afghanistan and Iraq. If passed, an untold number of veterans and service members could be affected.
PTSD can manifest in a myriad of ways and can affect each person differently. Symptoms can include self-destructive behavior, severe anxiety, depression, and difficulty sleeping. Unfortunately, there have been cases of infractions by soldiers exhibiting signs of PTSD leading to less than honorable discharges. According to army information, more than 22 thousand combat veterans have received less than honorable discharges due to infractions such as lateness and alcohol use, possible signs of PTSD.
A less than honorable discharge can affect a veteran’s livelihood for years to come. It may prevent them from receiving full veteran’s benefits and care, which may have adverse and sometimes fatal consequences. A recent article in the Military Times notes that veterans in this situation have a higher risk of suicide. Without the access to healthcare services, veterans who may be in their greatest period of need can find themselves on their own.
Standing up for Veteran’s Rights
At McCormack & McCormack, we believe that all veterans deserve access to the benefits that they have earned. If a criminal offense or infraction is putting your future and your career at risk, contact our firm immediately and tell us your story. As a service member, the charges and punishments you face can differ significantly from those levied against a civilian and it is important to retain the services of our legal advocate who is experienced in these matters. Our military criminal defense attorney is a former member of the U.S. Army Judge Advocate General (JAG) Corps and possesses decades of experience helping those in your situation.
Call now to request a no-cost consultation to learn about your legal options.
A member of the military and any branch of the armed forces of the United States will be subject to a court martial if they are accused of committing a crime or a serious violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). Some criminal offenses that require court martialing are quite similar to civilian offenses, such as sex crimes or illegal drug use; others are specific to a life in the military, like deserting your post or leaving your command without approval from a higher ranking officer. No matter the specifics of the case and charges, it is useful for a military defendant to understand the courts martial process before it begins in order to better bolster their defense.
Three Types of Court Martialing
The court martial process is not a singular entity. Instead, it branches into three specific categories based on the severity alleged crimes or violations.
The three categories of court martialing are:
- Summary: No military judge or attorneys from the Judge Advocate General (JAG) will be present during a summary court martial procedure. Only a single commissioned officer will be called upon to review the facts of your case and make a ruling. Not even defense counsel will be there, unless it is specifically requested and privately retained. Penalties can vary from 30 days confinement to rank reduction. Due to the expedited process of summary hearings, they are reserved for the least serious of offenses, such as public intoxication off-base.
- Special: Serious criminal offenses or violations, like insubordination, will go through special court martialing, which is similar to a traditional criminal trial outside of military jurisdiction. Three service members will come to a conclusion after a military judge presides over the trial process. A sentencing could include discharge from the military.
- General: If a criminal act or violation is considered quite severe, such as murder, the offender will be tried through a general court martial procedure. Maximum penalties can be used by the presiding military judge, including capital punishment and life in prison without parole.
Review of Court Martial Process
The average court martial process starts with a commanding officer (CO) being told of a service member’s illegal or detestable behavior. The CO may then make the decision to have the charge preferred against the alleged offender. Depending on the situation, the CO may only threaten a court martialing but instead use military penalties to replace it, such as ordering the service member to clean the barracks or run several miles; this alternate form of punishment should not be expected.
As with a civilian criminal trial, a service member can enter pleas with the court after they are told their charges. With the help of a military criminal defense attorney, it may be possible for the accused to gain a beneficial plea bargain, essentially trading their cooperation for reduced penalties. If the case does go to trial, it can play out in a similar fashion to other criminal court cases, including opening statements, presenting evidence, cross-examinations, and so on, until it concludes with the court martial panel’s verdict and the judge’s sentencing.
Hiring Private Defense Counsel
Are you facing court martialing? Contact McCormack & McCormack as soon as you can! Military Criminal Defense Attorney Greg McCormack has been representing and protecting accused service members for more than 36 years, and he does so all around the world. Call today for a free initial consultation.
What is the “Good Soldier” Defense?
Throughout the history of military criminal law, military defense lawyers have long relied on the strategy of emphasizing a defendant’s moral character. Known as the “good soldier” defense, this strategy highlights a service member’s record of conduct and professionalism as a means of showing that the accused is morally incapable of committing the crimes of which they stand accused. However, due to certain reforms included in 2015’s National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), accused military service members are no longer given the recourse of the good soldier defense and are treated more in line with their civilian counterparts.
Changes to the Defense
Having been backed by overwhelming bipartisan support and approval from scholars, changes in the NDAA have virtually eliminated the applicability of the good soldier defense by limiting the amount of admissible character evidence in court martial proceedings. Proponents of the changes have claimed that the previous practice of using the testimonies of high-ranking officers and peers to refute their charges essentially made certain individuals immune from prosecution, allowing long-tenured officers to tip the scales in their favor.
While character evidence may still be introduced before sentencing and during the fact-finding portion of the courts martial process for charges of desertion or disobeying orders, its use is now prohibited for a wide variety of offenses.
When Can’t the “Good Soldier” Defense Be Used?
The good soldier defense may not be used to defend against accusations of:
Why Is This Important?
Since the loss of any potential defense is, in essence, a win for the prosecution, the elimination of the good soldier defense serves as a blow to accused service members and places further emphasis on the need for a powerful legal team for soldiers to have a fighting chances against their charges. If you are a member of the military and have been accused of a crime, contact McCormack & McCormack today. Backed by more than 36 years of experience, our founding Military Criminal Defense Attorney Greg D. McCormack can provide the aggressive advocacy you need to protect your future.
Schedule a confidential consultation or call (888) 490-0876 today to get started.
Okinawa and all of Japan has been on edge in recent months after a series of scandals and incidents cast the United States military presence there in a negative light. Most recently, Petty Officer Aimee Mejia injured one local after causing a car accident due to her intoxication behind the wheel. After a night of off-base drinking, Mejia collided with two other vehicles; authorities report her blood alcohol concentration (BAC) was six times Japan’s legal limit of 0.03%.
In response to the incident, the Navy has banned all personnel stationed in Japan, whether they are in Okinawa or elsewhere, from imbibing alcohol until further notice. The order includes off-base and on-base consumption and applies to all officers, regardless of rank. Heavy restrictions are being implemented as to where and why Navy personnel can travel, too; unless a trip off the base is necessary, such as buying groceries or getting children from school and daycare, officers are not permitted to leave. Additionally, personnel will be required to take courses on the importance of drinking responsibly and how their individual actions affect the way Japan views America as a whole.
The country-wide move may not be enough to calm Okinawan protestors, however. The car accident occurred during a 30-day curfew and mourning order after a civilian military member stationed in Okinawa was arrested for admitting to killing and raping a local woman earlier in the year. Anger and distrust of the American military seems to be prevalent throughout Japan, as even Prime Minister Shinzo Abe voiced his open concerns to President Barack Obama during the G7 summit.
As these stories play out, it is important to remember that investigations are still ongoing. Both the individual named in the murder case and Petty Officer Mejia should be granted the opportunity to defend themselves in military or criminal court. At McCormack & McCormack, our military lawyers provide legal protection for military members all across the world. No matter where you are stationed, if you are facing serious accusations like the ones going on in Okinawa, you can depend on us for reliable and responsive counsel. Call toschedule a free initial consultation today.
News update: Since the time of this writing, the Navy has actually lifted portions of the alcohol ban in Japan. Personnel will be permitted to imbibe alcohol before 10:00 PM and with an accompanying officer, if they are “low ranking.” Due to the expedience of the ban’s lift, Okinawans have expressed further agitation towards the military presence. The Navy also announced that July 4th celebrations on Japanese naval bases will not be conducted this year.
What Are The Three Types of Court-Martial?
The military justice system generally speaking is far more streamlined and efficient than the civilian system. While civilian trials may wait years in busy jurisdictions before being heard, military justice system trials will frequently be much more efficient.
- 1. Summary court martial –Summary courts martial are the lowest level trials in the military justice system. Summary courts martial involve only one officer and do not require a panel or military judge. Usually defense attorneys are not involved in a summary court-martial. Trials of this type may be completed in as little as a several hours and rarely last longer than a day.
- 2. Special court martial –Special courts martial are the intermediate level in the military justice system and deal with the prosecution of more serious charges. As a result, once charges are formally referred, these cases can take an average of three to six months to get to trial. This timeframe may be extended even further if the trial involves a military panel rather than a single judge. Actual time in court can vary, but there may be a half day of so for a motion session (Art. 39a), plus 2-4 days of trial.
- 3. General court martial – The most egregious offenses are tried in general courts martial, the highest tier of trials. General courts martial require an Article 32 hearing and the involvement of multi-person panels, various witnesses, and extensive examination of evidence. As a result, once charges are formally referred, these cases can take in excess of three to six months to get to trial. Actual time in court can again vary, but there may be several motion sessions (Art. 39a), plus 3-5 or days of trial.
There are however cases where the investigation may seem to drag out for an extended period of time before charges are formally initiated. Frequently, the timeline for military trials depends on the type of court martial that has been assigned to the specific charge or charges.
Contact us 24/7 for your free initial consultation.
How Long Does a Court Martial Take?
Military trials (court martials) begins with witness interviews, requesting formal statements from the accused, and gathering evidence when the military suspects that someone may have committed a crime. This can take anywhere from 30 days to more than a year depending on the situation.
Regardless of the circumstances, it is imperative that individuals suspected of military criminal activity seek powerful legal counsel to ensure their rights are protected and begin preparing for the possibility of a trial. If you are being investigated for a crime, our knowledgeable military criminal defense lawyer at McCormack & McCormack can defend your freedom and level the playing field against the prosecution’s claims.
Having served as a former JAG officer and represented the rights of accused service members for more than 35 years, our founding lawyer Greg D. McCormack is equipped with the knowledge and skills to maximize your chances of securing a favorable outcome for your situation.
Call (888) 490-0876 or schedule a free consultation today to get started towards retaining the hard-hitting defense you deserve. We are available 24/7 to discuss your case.
