SECURITY CLEARANCE case results

Navy EOD Chief faced a General Court-Martial for charges related to the death of an Iraqi detainee. Our client, a second class at the time, was tasked with detection and disposal of suspected explosives believed to be under the bodies of two insurgents who were killed in combat. A third insurgent had surrendered and was in the custody of Iraqi Army forces. Upon arrival at the scene, our client reportedly told the Iraqi soldiers to have the detainee move the two insurgents’ bodies. The Iraqi Army pushed the detainee into the ravine where the bodies were located, at which time the detainee picked up a weapon, raised it to fire upon coalition forces, and was then shot and killed by U.S. and Iraqi soldiers. Our client was charged with two specifications of reckless endangerment and dereliction of duty. The military jury acquitted our client of the reckless endangerment charges but convicted him of dereliction of duty. On sentencing, we secured a sentence of no punishment. After trial, our client’s security clearance was fully reinstated and he returned to full duty status while we continue efforts to set aside the conviction.

A Navy E-6 with 19 years of service came to us after being discharged for a positive urinalysis. We filed a petition before the Board of Corrections and secured a reversal of his discharge. He was administratively reinstated into the Navy and retired, with an award of back pay and lost retirement benefits.

Navy E-5, with over 12 years of military service, tested positive for cocaine but was not notified of the positive urinalysis until nine months later during her security clearance reinvestigation. Our client passed a civilian polygraph, yet the command refused our request for her to take an NCIS polygraph. At her Special Court-Martial, we presented definitive evidence that she could have unknowingly ingested cocaine if someone put cocaine in her soda while she was working at her civilian job at a restaurant. Despite overwhelming evidence in support of our case at trial, our client was found guilty at a Special Court-Martial. She was reduced in rate two pay grades but was retained. After trial, we again requested that the command permit her to take an NCIS polygraph, which was again denied.

A Navy E-5 contacted our firm after being charged with three offenses in Hampton: Annoying Ringing of a Telephone (Class 3 misdemeanor) and Stalking and Profane Language Over Public Airways (both Class 1 misdemeanors). The complaining witness saved a voicemail left by our client that included an apparent threat of bodily harm, as well as text messages showing profane language. The complaining witness wanted to pursue the charges and requested that the Commonwealth’s Attorney seek active jail time. After discussions with the prosecutor, the prosecutor agreed to nolle prosse the Profane Language and Stalking charges and reduce the remaining charge, with a deferral period of six months. Because our client’s Navy position and TS-SCI clearance would have been negatively impacted by a deferral on a Class 1 misdemeanor, we went back to the prosecutor, who agreed to nolle prosse both Class 1 misdemeanors and defer the Annoying Ringing charge for six months, after which it will be dismissed.

E-6 Reservist, with 15 years of service and living overseas, was charged with improper registration of a POV through tax-free on-base MVRO, as well as multiple specifications of improper purchase of tax-free items through the Exchange System when no longer eligible as a result of demobilization. By unanimous vote of the Administrative Separation Board, our client was retained and permitted to continue a career toward achieving retirement eligibility.

Navy Warrant Officer was charged with multiple sexual-related offenses involving females on his command. Although we negotiated a favorable pre-trial agreement that protected him from extensive confinement, the client was more concerned with saving his career for retirement eligibility. We rejected the plea agreement and took the case to a members trial. We secured an acquittal of many charges, though the client was convicted of some offenses and sentenced to a short period of confinement, but was not dismissed from the Navy. The command then initiated a Board of Inquiry to administratively discharge our client and deny retirement benefits. At the Board of Inquiry, our client was retained, permitting him to continue his career and retire when he chose.

Navy O-3E with 23+ years of service was taken to NJP and received a letter of reprimand for dereliction of duty. NAVPERS directed that our client appear before a Show Cause Board of Inquiry in an effort to separate the officer for misconduct. Upon our representation before the Board of Inquiry, our client was retained and will be able to continue his career until he retires.

Navy E-6 Corpsman was charged with multiple drug-related offenses, including wrongful possession of narcotics issued pursuant to Corpsman duties, wrongful use of steroids, larceny of narcotics and ammunition, forgery, fraud, and adultery. After an Article 32 investigation, we secured withdrawal of all charges conditioned upon accepting NJP for wrongful use of steroids and forgery. At NJP, our client received minimal punishment and was not reduced in rank. He then appeared before an administrative separation board due to the Navy’s zero-tolerance program on drug offenses, along with allegations of rehab failure and forgery. At the administrative separation board, we secured a finding of no rehab failure and a recommendation that our client be retained in the Navy.

Coast Guard E-5 retained our firm after a positive urinalysis for marijuana. Our client had a prior positive several years earlier in his career. We advised our client to refuse NJP and demand trial by court-martial. The command elected to proceed by administrative separation board instead. After challenges to board membership required rescheduling, we presented evidence of unknowing ingestion of marijuana. Despite government arguments regarding the prior positive and pre-service marijuana use, the board voted in our client’s favor and he was retained in the Coast Guard.

Naval Chief Petty Officer with 19 years of service was charged with internet child pornography-related offenses, as well as pornography-related offenses on the service member’s office computer. After extensive pre-trial negotiations, a favorable plea agreement was reached where the office pornography-related allegations were dismissed, the reduction was limited to not exceed two pay grades, confinement was limited to not exceed 90 days, and a punitive discharge was suspended. At trial, we secured a sentence of a one-grade reduction and 89 days of confinement. After trial, the command initiated administrative separation action for misconduct to deny retirement. We secured a retention recommendation from the Board, allowing the service member to retire.

Air Force O-4 with approximately 19 years of service was convicted by a military jury of wrongful possession of child pornography. At sentencing, the prosecution sought lengthy confinement and a punitive dismissal, which would have caused loss of retirement and VA benefits. We secured a sentence of only 30 days of confinement and some forfeitures, and he was not punitively dismissed. The Air Force then initiated administrative separation proceedings that could still have denied retirement and VA benefits. At the Board of Inquiry, we presented supporting statements from court-martial jury members indicating they believed our client should be retained to retire. The Board agreed and retained our client so he could retire upon reaching 20 years of service. Our client has since retired from the Air Force.

Navy Captain (O-6) was a squadron commander. During a preliminary investigation on allegations of sexual harassment of an E-4, our client provided some false responses to the investigating officer about what occurred at a restaurant/bar. After being advised there was a security video and advised of Article 31b rights for false official statement, our client provided accurate answers. Our client was detached for cause and taken to Admiral’s Mast for four specifications of false official statement and conduct unbecoming an officer for endeavoring to impede an investigation. At administrative separation proceedings (Show Cause Board of Inquiry), our client faced forced retirement with an Other Than Honorable discharge and reduction to a lower paygrade. By a vote of 3-0, the Board recommended our client retire with an honorable discharge in his current paygrade of O-6.

Air Force officer was convicted of possession of child pornography. At sentencing before an officer jury, we secured a sentence of only 30 days of confinement and some forfeitures, and our client was not discharged. Although our client had approximately 19 years of service, the Air Force initiated administrative Show Cause Board of Inquiry proceedings to pursue separation and deny retirement benefits. At the board, we secured a retention recommendation, allowing our client to retire from the Air Force.

Navy nursing officer with over 20 years in service was charged with numerous offenses alleging theft and use of controlled drugs while deployed on a ship, as well as while employed part time at a civilian hospital. Prior to the court-martial, civilian authorities charged our client with multiple felony counts of prescription fraud. Tasked to do all we could to save his career and retirement, we negotiated a PTA that protected him against dismissal and then secured a sentence that did not include a dismissal. We also secured withdrawal of all civilian charges.

A Navy E-5 with 18 years of service came to us with a positive urinalysis for cocaine. Our client had previously been acquitted on a prior urinalysis charge for cocaine two years earlier. After refusing NJP, we secured a no misconduct result at an administrative separation board. Two years later, our client tested positive a third time for cocaine. The command was not inclined to allow retirement after three positives in three years. Because the second case went to an administrative separation board, no double jeopardy applied, and the command referred the second use charge to court-martial. We negotiated a PTA where the second urinalysis charge was withdrawn, and our client stipulated to evidence on the third charge under an agreement that protected him from confinement but exposed him to a BCD and loss of retirement. At sentencing, we secured a one paygrade reduction and no punitive discharge, allowing our client to retire.

Navy Chief Warrant Officer was charged with assorted UCMJ violations related to alleged theft of government computer equipment from DRMO. Our client had 20+ years of service and was advised of the charges the day before his retirement ceremony. Two co-defendants implicated him as having received stolen government property. He was found not guilty of all charges by the jury and retired the following week.

Navy E-8 with well over 20 years of service was charged with larceny of over $60,000 from the Chief’s fund on board a naval ship. Evidence showed our client wrote checks from the Chief’s fund payable to himself and used for personal expenses. We negotiated a plea agreement providing partial restitution and a sentencing cap to limit confinement, though it still exposed him to a punitive discharge and loss of retirement benefits. The Government argued for lengthy confinement and pressed for a punitive discharge. We asked for reduction to an intermediate paygrade, no discharge, and 89 days of confinement. The judge reduced our client to E-3, imposed 89 days of confinement, and did not discharge him. Our client retired from the Navy.

Navy Master-at-Arms Chief Petty Officer (E-7) with over 19 years of service tested positive for marijuana. During the investigation, our client made a statement to NCIS admitting wrongful use. At Special Court-Martial, although we prevailed on a motion to suppress that statement, the case was still proceeding to trial. Due to the remaining evidence, we secured the command’s agreement to proceed by Summary Court-Martial, where our client pleaded guilty and was reduced to E-6, with forfeitures and 45 days of restriction. On clemency, we secured suspension of the 45 days of restriction. Seven months before the 20-year mark, the command initiated administrative separation proceedings. At the separation board, our client again admitted wrongful use. The board recommended the separation be suspended for six months and that, upon discharge, our client receive an honorable discharge certificate.

Army COL detached for cause, administratively reprimanded, issued a referred Officer Evaluation Report, and processed for elimination after being identified to show cause for retention based upon personal misconduct involving an inappropriate relationship and conduct unbecoming. We obtained a voluntary retirement in lieu of elimination, with the Retirement Grade Determination Review Board recommending, and the Secretary of the Army approving, retirement as a Colonel.

Active Duty Army O-5 received a letter of reprimand placed in the Official Military Personnel File and was detached for cause with a referred OER based on allegations of multiple incidents over an extended period, after consuming alcohol, including inappropriate touching, obscene comments, and vulgar suggestions to officer and civilian personnel. The matter proceeded to the Officer Retirement Grade Determination Board. After review of the response package prepared by our firm, the officer was permitted to retire as an O-5.

Army O-4 submitted a voluntary retirement request and then received notice of review by the Army Grade Determination Review Board to determine the highest grade served satisfactorily for retirement. The review stemmed from a prior General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand and an AR 15-6 investigation with allegations of abusive, disrespectful, and unprofessional leadership and failure to foster a climate of dignity and respect. We assisted with preparation and submission of a response package. Result: the Board recommended O-4 as the highest grade served satisfactorily, and the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army made the final determination to allow retirement at paygrade O-4.

Navy E-8 with over 20 years of service was charged with online solicitation of a minor and possession of child pornography. We negotiated a resolution that resulted in a two-grade reduction and a maximum of 30 days in the brig. Our client will be able to retire from the Navy in paygrade E-6.

Administrative action requiring show cause for retention was initiated against an officer due to alleged misconduct (wrongful use of a controlled substance), substandard performance (marginal service over an extended time), and failure to conform to prescribed standards of military deportment (physical readiness program failures). The officer elected a Board of Inquiry. The Board found the misconduct and marginal service reasons were not supported by sufficient evidence. Although the Board found the failure to conform reason was supported, the officer was not recommended for separation. The case closed, proceedings terminated, and the client can now retire after 29+ years of service.

Attorney Robert Canoy represented an active duty Navy E-3 charged with felony strangulation and misdemeanor assault. Through background investigation, Attorney Canoy discovered evidence undermining the motives and credibility of the complaining witness. Using this evidence, Attorney Canoy secured dismissal of all charges with eligibility for expungement.

E-5 tested positive for amphetamines during a command unit sweep and was separated for misconduct, drug abuse. A petition was filed with the Board for Correction of Military Record based upon a flawed chain of custody, improper changes to batch and specimen numbers after the fact, and testing personnel submitting their own samples and having access to their own specimens. The Board granted full relief, including setting aside the misconduct discharge, revising the discharge date to the date of the Board’s approved decision, issuing an honorable discharge, assigning an RE-1 reenlistment code, and confirming eligibility for back pay from the date of initial separation to the date of the approved decision.

A Navy SEAL first class petty officer was discharged after a positive urinalysis. A separation board recommended separation with a General under Honorable conditions characterization. We filed a petition for review before the Board of Corrections. After nearly 2.5 years of ongoing legal maneuvering, the Board reversed the finding of misconduct. The Navy credited the sailor for pay purposes for time since discharge, retained him with full retirement pay and benefits, and cleared his record of any reference to the alleged drug usage.

Army Reserve O-5, following honorable discharge and receipt of the final Chronological Statement of Retirement Points, learned a review determined termination of a past period of active duty on the DD Form 214 incorrectly reflected a hardship discharge instead of release from active duty, jeopardizing creditable points for retirement pay at age 60. Seeking changes to the narrative reason for separation, separation code, and separation authority, we represented the member through an application and petition for record change/correction to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records. The Board determined the request had merit and granted full relief.