• ACQUITTED Aggravated Sexual Assault Charge
    • Military Defense
    Marine E-4 who was married had a junior Marine who was under the age of 21 at his on base housing where they consumed alcohol. They then went to a strip club off base and returned to his house. The female alleged that when she woke up on his couch early the next morning, that he was on top of her and sexually penetrating her. The next morning, she advised another Marine that she had been sexually assaulted while she was intoxicated and asleep. Our client appeared before a General Court-Martial for charges of fraternization, adultery, providing alcohol to a person under the minimum drinking age and aggravated sexual assault. We plead our client guilty to the adultery and providing alcohol to the complainant, and took the fraternization and aggravated sexual assault charges to a jury with enlisted membership. The jury returned a verdict of NOT GUILTY of the fraternization and sexual assault charge.
  • CHARGES REDUCED Coast Guard E-3 Accused of Attempted Rape
    • Military Defense
    Coast Guard E-3 was charged with attempted rape and indecent assault upon a female crew member after he was found in the female's rack on the ship. Both the alleged victim and our client were intoxicated, however our client later gave a very damaging statement to the investigator. Before the Art. 32, we were able to negotiate a pre-trial agreement which provided for dismissal of the attempted rape charge and a plea of guilty to a lessor offense on the sexual assault charge - that plea would eliminate the requirement of our client to register as a sexual offender. The deal provided for the government to suspend any confinement in excess of one year. At trial, after the military judge accepted our client's plea to the lessor charge, the prosecution asked the judge to sentence our client to 18 months of confinement and a Bad Conduct Discharge. Despite the prosecution's argument, we secured a sentence of only 30 days of confinement and reduction to E-1 - the judge did not discharge our client.
  • CRIMINAL PROSECUTION AVOIDED Naval Officer Accused of Sexual Assault
    • Military Defense
    A Naval officer was charged with sexual assault of a dependent wife. After the Art. 32 Investigation during which we established significant issues as to the credibility of the complainant, the case was sent to Captain's Mast on board a Naval ship, at which time the officer was found guilty and reprimanded. Subsequent to the Captain's Mast, we were able to secure the SETTING ASIDE of the Mast, as well as the termination of administrative separation proceedings. We thereafter assisted our client is securing his promotion which had been held in abeyance due to the charges and our client has been promoted once again.
  • Honorable Discharge at Current Paygrade Officer Misconduct
    • Military Defense
    Navy Captain (0-6) 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 as to what occurred during the incident at a restaurant/bar. After being advised there was a security video of the interaction, and being advised of his Art. 31b rights for false official statement, our client provided accurate answers to the questions. After the interview, our client reportedly requested the IO not to include some of his comments in the report. Our client was detached for cause and taken to Admiral’s Mast for 4 specifications of false official statement as well as conduct unbecoming an officer for endeavoring to impede an investigation. At the administrative separation proceedings (Show Cause Board of Inquiry) our client faced a forced retirement with an Other than Honorable Discharge, as well as a reduction to a reduced paygrade which would result in a significant decrease of retirement income. By a vote of 3-0, the Board recommended our client retire with an Honorable Discharge in his current paygrade of 0-6.
  • Reduced Charge of Manslaughter SHOOTING DEATH OF BEST FRIEND
    • Military Defense
    Navy sailor was convicted of voluntary manslaughter by local authorities for the shooting death of his best friend. After he completed serving his state sentence, the Navy charged him with murder and obstruction of justice, at which time he retained our firm to represent him in the General Court-Martial. Factually, our client and the decedent were handling several firearms. Although alcohol was involved, the shooting occurred when the decedent asked our client (who was playing a video came) to look at a pistol the decedent was holding. Our client reached over to grab the pistol with one hand, while still playing the video game with the other had. After being told by the decedent that the gun was not on safe, out client attempted with his one hand to put the gun in a safe mode, instead discharging the weapon, striking this best friend below the eye, resulting in his immediate death. Our client panicked and called 911, saying his best friend just shot himself, and placed the pistol in the decedent’s hand. The Navy prosecution aggressive processed the case in an effort to secure a murder conviction, despite our offer to plead our client to what he was guilty of, voluntary manslaughter and obstruction of justice, as a result of his reckless handling of the firearm. Unable to secure a pretrial agreement for the reduced charge of manslaughter, we took the case to trial. Without putting our client on the witness stand, we secured an acquittal of the murder charge, with a finding of guilty to the lessor offense of manslaughter which we plead our client guilty to before the contested charge of murder started.
  • NOT GUILTY Navy Enlisted Man Escapes Murder Sentence
    • Military Defense
    Two Navy enlisted members were charged with the premeditated murder (beating to death) of another sailor. We represented the individual that started the physical altercation and who, according to the evidence, physically kicked the victim in the face on numerous occasions. The kicking was determined to have been directly linked to the death. We spent over four days picking a jury and after an extended trial, convinced the jury that he was NOT GUILTY of murder, successfully getting the charge reduced to aggravated assault and only an 18-month brig sentence. The co-defendant, who was represented by a different local civilian attorney, was in the eyes of many people not as culpable as our client. He was convicted by a second jury of murder and sentenced to fifty (50) years.
  • Reduced to Voluntary Manslaughter Murder Charge
    • Military Defense
    Navy Third Class was charged with premeditated murder in the beating death of his wife in Bermuda. After the Article 32 Investigation, we were able to negotiate a plea on a voluntary manslaughter charge and took the case to an enlisted jury for sentencing. The jury returned a SENTENCE OF 268 DAYS OF CONFINEMENT, EXACTLY THE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT CLIENT HAD SERVED IN PRETRIAL CONFINEMENT
  • RETAINED CAREER Naval Warrant Officer Charged With Fraternization
    • Military Defense
    Navy Warrant Officer was charged with multiple sexual related offenses with females on his command. Although we negotiated a rather favorable pre-trial agreement which protected him from extensive confinement, the client was more concerned with attempting to save his career for retirement eligibility. We eventually rejected the plea agreement and took the case to a members trial. Although we secured an acquittal of many of the charges, the client was convicted of some very serious offenses and was sentenced to a short period of confinement, but was not dismissed from the Navy. The command then initiated a Board of Inquiry in an effort to administratively discharge our client to deny him retirement benefits. When we appeared before the Board, our client was RETAINED, which permitted him to continue his career and to retire when he desired to do so.
  • CHARGES DISMISSED Navy Man Charged With Sex Related Charges
    • Military Defense
    A Navy Second Class was charged with sexual related charges involving a co-worker who alleged that he exposed himself and masturbated in front of her on numerous occasions at work. After the Article 32, all charges were DISMISSED.
  • NOT GUILTY OF ALL CHARGES Senior Navy Chief Charged with Sexual Harassment & Abusive Sexual Conduct
    • Military Defense
    Navy Senior Chief with 15 years of outstanding service faced a Special Court-Martial on charges of sexual harassment and abusive sexual contact (with resultant sex offender registration if convicted) on allegations of grabbing the arm of an E-3 while attempting to kiss her on two occasions, in addition to repeatedly otherwise subjecting her to offensive conduct over a several month period of time. An enlisted jury found our client NOT GUILTY of both charges.
  • REDUCED PUNISHMENT Navy E-7 Charged With Internet Sex Crimes
    • Military Defense
    Navy E-7 was charged with violating Article 80, UCMJ for attempting to communicate indecent language to a child, as well four (4) specifications of Article 134, UCMJ, for using the internet to solicit a minor for immoral purposes, attempted transfer of obscene materials, as well as possession and distribution of child pornography. Our client was facing an Art 32 investigation as a prelude to a General Court-Martial. After our office was retained, we were able to negotiate a pre-trial agreement that provided for the case being referred to a Special Court-Martial, rather than a General Court-Martial where our client would likely face a dishonorable discharge, as well as several years of confinement. We were also able to secure the withdrawal of two of the Art 134 specifications relating to using the internet to solicit a minor and to attempt to transfer obscene material. Although the judge sentenced our client to a bad conduct discharge, 12 months of confinement, reduction to pay grade E-1 and a fine of $10,000.00, we were later able to secure the Command's agreement to suspend the confinement sentence in excess of 6 months - our client ended up serving only 5 months, less good time of 25 days. The fine was also disapproved pursuant to the terms of the Pre-Trial Agreement, and his family was permitted to receive his pay during his confinement despite automatic forfeitures. Although his trial was scheduled to occur prior to the Christmas holiday, we were also able to secure an agreement to defer commencement of confinement until after the holidays, so that he could be with his family for the holidays.
  • NOT GUILTY Military Doctor Accused of Sexual Assault of Patient
    • Military Defense
    Military physician was charged with sexually assaulting a female patient while examining her alone in his office. The officer was found NOT GUILTY of all charges by a General Courts-Martial jury.
  • CHARGES REDUCED Petty Officer Accused of Rape
    • Military Defense
    Navy petty officer retained us a few days before he was scheduled to appear at a General Court-Martial on charges of rape and sodomy. The plea agreement which was signed by our client before we were retained, required him to plead guilty to rape which carried a maximum punishment of life without possibility of parole. Although our client signed a confession for the investigator wherein he admitted to sexually assaulting and committing sodomy of the complainant who was non-responsive due to intoxication, we felt he had a defense to the rape charge based upon his confession. Upon retention, we withdrew from the pretrial agreement and waived the Art. 32 in an effort to avoid the sodomy charge being changed to a forcible sodomy charge which our client effectively confessed to. We were then able to renegotiate the plea agreement that provided that our client plead guilty to a lessor charge of attempted rape and sodomy, which subjected him to a maximum punishment of 25 years (instead of life without possibility of parole as provided for under his original plea agreement). After the military judge accepted the pleas, although he sentenced our client to two years of confinement (the plea agreement provided for suspension of any sentence in excess of 12 months), he did NOT reduce our client’s rank, and most notably, our client was NOT SENTENCED TO A PUNITIVE DISCHARGE.
  • NOT GUILTY Sexual Assault of Family Member
    • Military Defense
    Navy E-6 charged with raping and sexually assaulting his step daughter over several years, as well as the assault and battery on his step daughter and son. In a negotiated plea agreement, we were able to secure the Government's WITHDRAWAL of the rape charge, as well as the charge of assault on his son, in addition to the merger of three specifications of sexual assault into one specification. The Government further provided a sentence limitation, with the understanding the Government would still prosecute the merged "mega-specification" of sexual assault. In a trial before the military judge alone, our client was found NOT GUILTY of the remaining sexual assault charge and received a time served sentence (200 days) and reduction to E-3 for the assaults upon his step daughter which resulted in a perforated ear drum, and permanent scarring on her back from being struck by a belt.
  • CHARGES WITHDRAWN Multiple Sex Offense Charges
    • Military Defense
    Navy E-6 charged with multiple sex offenses against his mentally handicapped natural daughter who was under the age of 12, to include forcible sodomy. At the Art 32 investigation, although our client's daughter did not testify, the child's mother and maternal grandmother testified, as well as the emergency room doctor who examined the child, a social worker and NCIS agent who interviewed the child. After extensive cross-examination of all prosecution witnesses, the Investigating Officer found NO PROBABLE CAUSE to support any of the charges and recommended withdrawal of all charges. The command concurred - ALL CHARGES WERE WITHDRAWN.
  • NOT GUILTY OF ALL CHARGES MULTIPLE SEXUAL ASSAULT CHARGES
    • Military Defense
    Navy E-5 faced a General Court-Martial on charges of Sexual Assault (digital penetration without consent and/or while alleged victim unable to consent due to being incapacitated by alcohol) as well as assault/battery (undressing alleged victim without her consent). Client was interrogated by NCIS - prosecution played a video recording of the interrogation where client admitted that the alleged victim was intoxicated, was "stumbling" and was having a hard time walking immediately prior to him engaging in sexual activity with her. Other witnesses confirmed she had a significant amount of tequila to drink (approximately 1/2 of a 750ml bottle). After extensive cross examination of the alleged victim, where significant damage was done to her "story"- and without putting on any evidence in our defense case, we secure a verdict of NOT GUILTY of ALL CHARGES.
  • NOT GUILTY Domestic and Sexual Assault Charges
    • Military Defense

    Army E-7 with 22 years of service faced accusations of domestic assault/battery on his former wife, and his son, as well as sexual abuse of his daughter. In addition, he was charged with abusive sexual contact of two young girls who lived with their mother in the house he shared with his NCO roommate. Prior to trial, we litigated issues related to allegations of his former wife which were considered as uncharged misconduct. At that motion session, his former wife and her mother were required to testify and as a result of extensive cross-examination, the Government later withdrew all charges related to his family. At the trial by military judge alone, Mr. McCormack’s cross-examination of the children, and their mother clearly exposed significant problems with their respective testimony. Without presenting any evidence in the defense case, our client was found NOT GUILTY of the Charge and specifications that had been hanging over his head for approximately three years.

  • CLIENT RETAINED Officer Separation
    • Military Defense

    Administrative separation proceeding was initiated against Navy CWO3 with 27 years of service, on allegations of misconduct and substandard performance of duty, as a result of violating a lawful general order (Navy Equal Opportunity Policy- sexual harassment). The officer had previously accepted NJP, and elected the right to be heard before a Board of Inquiry. At the Board of Inquiry, we acknowledged misconduct, however argued that our client should be retained for further service. Represented by McCormack & McCormack, the Board of Inquiry, found by a 3/0 vote that our client should be retained.

  • WILL RETIRE OFFICER CONVICTED OF POSSESSION OF CHILD PORNOGRAPHY RETAINED
    • Military Defense
    Air Force officer was convicted of possession of child pornography. After presentation of evidence on sentencing to an officer jury, we were able to secure a sentence of only thirty (30) days of confinement and some forfeitures – 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 in an effort to secure an administrative separation of our client, which would deny his receipt of retirement benefits. Upon appearance before the separation board, we were able to secure a RETENTION recommendation, which will result in our client being able to retire from the Air Force.
  • NO MISCONDUCT AT ADMIN SEPARATION BOARD Sailor Pleads Guilty At NJP To Wrongful Sexual Contact
    • Military Defense
    Navy second class retained us to represent him before an administrative separation board for misconduct of wrongful sexual contact with a female sailor while deployed. He plead guilty to the charge at Captain's Mast three years earlier, but was not processed for administrative separation which was mandatory. Naval Personnel Command apparently discovered that the command failed to process him for administrative separation and directed the command to do so. Although our client plead guilty to the charge at Mast, our representation resulted in a 3-0 vote of NO MISCONDUCT and retention of our client.
  • Charges Dropped Officer Misconduct
    • Military Defense
    Navy 0-2 went to Captain’s Mast on charges related to two physical assaults of his girlfriend (a Navy 0-3), one assault allegedly occurring onboard the ship while our client was on duty carrying a firearm. After Mast, he was detached for cause. Although he was a probationary officer and could have been summarily separated with a General Under Honorable Discharge, we were able to get the case before a Show Cause Board of Inquiry. At the Board hearing, the ex-girlfriend testified as to her version of events, but after Mr. McCormack’s extensive cross examination her credibility was significantly hit upon, to the point where the Board members announced that they had no need to hear any further evidence on the case - they had already decided our client did not commit misconduct based on her testimony.
  • promoted to the rank of First Lieutenant Army O-1 Promotion Delay
    • Military Defense
    Promotion Delay (to O-2) and Referral to the Promotion Review Board proceedings were initiated against Army O-1, due to past substantive derogatory information contained in the officer’s record. The officer elected the right to rebut the action and to submit matters for consideration by the Promotion Review Board. Represented by McCormack & McCormack, the Secretary of the Army, upon review of the evidence presented, attesting to why the officer should be retained and promoted to the next higher grade, restored the officer’s promotion eligibility, and was subsequently promoted to the rank of First Lieutenant.
  • NOT GUILTY Husband's Stabbing
    • Military Defense
    An Army E-6 was accused of repeatedly stabbing her husband. At trial before enlisted members, which took place in Korea, the accused was found NOT GUILTY of the charges of attempted premeditated murder and aggravated assault.
  • Non-Judicial Punishment Air Force Officer Charged With Sexual Offenses
    • Military Defense
    Air Force officer charged in civilian court with sexual offenses against his wife. We were able to negotiate the AF assuming jurisdiction of the case, and thereafter negotiated a disposition of the charges at Non-Judicial Punishment.
  • WITHDRAWAL Homicide
    • Military Defense
    A junior Naval enlisted man was charged with homicide in civilian court related to the death of a young Navy man which occurred during a party at our client’s house where LSD had been ingested by some of the participants. Prosecutors alleged that our client, and several others, caused the man's death by holding him down for extended periods of time with a pillow over his face in an effort to keep him quite. After an extended preliminary hearing, we secured a WITHDRAWAL of the charge.
  • SET ASIDE Assault Case
    • Military Defense
    A Navy Lieutenant Commander who was an Executive Officer of a Naval ship had been summarily taken to Admiral's Mast while deployed at sea for offenses involving alleged assault upon one of the junior sailors in his command. The client’s career was at that point ruined, with promotion impossible. Upon our retention, we were able to get the Admiral's Mast VACATED and SET ASIDE in its entirely. The officer was reassigned as Executive Officer at a new command and will now have a successful career.
  • Reduced to Voluntary Manslaughter Murder Charge
    • Military Defense
    Navy Third Class was charged with premeditated murder in the beating death of his wife in Bermuda. After the Article 32 Investigation, we were able to negotiate a plea on a voluntary manslaughter charge and took the case to an enlisted jury for sentencing. The jury returned a SENTENCE OF 268 DAYS OF CONFINEMENT, EXACTLY THE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT CLIENT HAD SERVED IN PRETRIAL CONFINEMENT
  • SET ASIDE THE SENTENCE Involuntary Manslaughter
    • Military Defense
    Marine E-3 plead guilty to charges of involuntary manslaughter, disobedience of a lawful order, drunk driving and three counts of aggravated assault related to an automobile accident which resulted in the death of a young woman. Upon advice of his military lawyers, the Marine signed a pretrial agreement that called for the guilty pleas, but which failed to in any manner give him any form of protection as to the sentence that could be imposed by the court. After he was sentenced to 15 years of confinement by a military jury (reduced to 13 years by the convening authority), the Marine's family retained our services to represent him on appeal. In our appellate brief, we argued that there were several appellate errors in his case, to include the Government's breach of its obligation under the pretrial agreement. The appellate court ruled in our favor and SET ASIDE THE SENTENCE of 13 years, remanding the case for a new sentencing hearing.
  • Honorable Discharge Detainee Abuse
    • Military Defense
    Navy Seal was charged with multiple offenses related to detainee abuse. On the day prior to the Art. 32 investigation, we secured an agreement to dispose of the charges at non-judicial punishment, with an agreement by the command that our client would not be administratively separated and would be allowed to complete his term of service and be DISCHARGED WITH AN HONORABLE DISCHARGE certificate.
  • DISMISSED Domestic Assault
    • Military Defense
    Our client, a junior Navy enlisted, was charged with assault and battery of his 8 year old stepchild. The child had multiple contusions and discoloration over his buttocks and parts of his legs. Our client had confessed to spanking the child with his hand and belt. In court, against strong opposition, we argued that since our client had a clean record and had no intent of injuring the child, that the court should impose a deferred finding and take the matter under advisement. The prosecution strongly argued for the court to convict the father and impose an appropriate punishment for assaulting and battering the child. After further argument, the judge agreed with our position and "deferred" the finding which means that as long as our client remains on good behavior and complies with the court's requirements during the period the finding is deferred, the case will be automatically dismissed.
  • Dismissed Domestic Assault Charges
    • Military Defense
    Our client, Navy enlisted, was charged with domestic assault for hitting his wife. His wife claimed that during an argument, he slapped her across the face. At trial, the wife admitted to "poking" her husband in the forehead. Her husband testified that she "jabbed" him, not only on the forehead, but in his chest, as well. The judge "jabbing" her husband and DISMISSED the charge.
  • General Discharge under Honorable Conditions. Navy Arsonist
    • Military Defense
    Navy E-1 confessed to setting five (5) fires on board a Naval warship. We secured a plea agreement that merged the five offenses into one charge and secured a sentence of 4 months of confinement, with no punitive discharge. Although our client was then looking at being discharged with an Other Than Honorable discharge certificate, he left the Navy with a General Discharge under Honorable Conditions.
  • DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE Air Force Physician – Sex Assaults on Patients
    • Military Defense
    An Air Force doctor was charged with two (2) specifications of dereliction of duty, five (5) specifications of indecent assaults upon his female patients and one (1) specification of attempted indecent assault another female patient. After our extensive cross-examinations at the Article 32 hearing, the Investigating Officer recommended dismissing all indecent assault charges. This recommendation, however, was ignored by the Convening Authority and the charges were referred to a General Court-Martial where our client faced the possibility of 31 years in confinement. Prior to trial, we negotiated a Pre-Trial Agreement wherein all indecent assault charges were WITHDRAWN AND DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
  • NO PUNISHMENT Death of an Iraqi detainee
    • Military Defense
    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 that were 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 Iraq Army forces. Upon arrival at the scene, our client reportedly told the Iraqi soldiers to have the detainee in their custody 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 US and Iraqi soldiers. Our client was charged with 2 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 were able to secure a sentence of NO PUNISHMENT. After trial, our client’s security clearance was fully reinstated and he has been returned to full duty status while we continue with our efforts to secure a set aside of the conviction.
  • CHARGES DISMISSED Misdemeanor in an Assault Case
    • Military Defense
    Our client, an E-4 in the US Navy, retained us after being charged with providing false information to law enforcement officers, a Class 1 misdemeanor. He was charged after officers responded to a residence looking to serve an arrest warrant for the resident, our client’s friend, for being UA from the Navy. When the officers came to the door, our client answered and told the officers he didn’t know if his friend was home. They did not believe him, and he attempted to leave the residence. While speaking with officers outside the home, his friend allegedly came out of a closet behind the front door, assaulted a police officer, and jumped out of a window to escape. At trial, we successfully argued that the police officer’s testimony was insufficient to prove that our client was aware that his friend was home, and that his statement to the officers was false. The judge agreed with our position and DISMISSED the charge.
  • DEFERRED TO DISMISS/Security Clearance Retained Misdemeanor Charges
    • Military Defense
    A Navy E-5 contacted our firm after being charged with three offenses in Hampton: Annoying Ringing of a Telephone, a Class 3 misdemeanor; and Stalking and Profane Language over Public Airways, both Class 1 misdemeanors. The person who made the complaint against our client saved a voicemail left by our client, in which she apparently threatened bodily harm to the alleged victim, as well as text messages showing our client using profane language. The complaining witness wanted to pursue the charges and requested that the commonwealth’s attorney seek active jail time. However, after several discussions with the prosecutor, the prosecutor agreed to nolle prosse the Profane Language and Stalking charges, and reduce the Stalking charge to Trespassing and withhold entering a finding of guilty for 6 months. While this would ordinarily be a decent outcome, our client’s status and position in the Navy, as well as her TS-SCI security clearance, would have been negatively impacted by a deferral on a Class 1 misdemeanor. We went back to the prosecutor at the last minute she thereby agreed to NOLLE PROSSE both Class 1 misdemeanors, and DEFER the Annoying Ringing charge for a period of 6 months, after which it will be DISMISSED.
  • NOT GUILTY Iraq Detainee Abuse
    • Military Defense

    Greg McCormack was retained to represent Petty Officer Jonathan Keefe, one of three Navy SEALs who faced court-martial for alleged detainee abuse of the terrorist who has been identified as the mastermind behind the infamous Blackwater Bridge incident in 2004 where the bodies of 4 Blackwater security members were mutilated, and hung off a bridge in Iraq.

    PO Keefe was charged with failing to safeguard the detainee after his capture by the SEALs, as well as false official statement when he denied to NCIS having any knowledge of the alleged detainee abuse. When the Government refused to produce the detainee at his client's trial, Mr. McCormack moved the court to compel the Government to produce the detainee – the court granted the motion, but ordered the trial to be held in Baghdad. Prior to trial, Mr. McCormack moved to suppress the statement that his client made to NCIS (that he did not witness any abuse), because that statement was the basis of the false official statement charge – that motion was also granted, which resulted in the withdrawal of that charge.

    Mr. McCormack then traveled to Baghdad, where he took his client’s case to trial by military judge alone - PO Keefe was found NOT GUILTY, not only saving the career of an outstanding Navy SEAL, but also helping to protect our military personnel against the ever present false claim of “detainee abuse” by the terrorists that are captured by our armed forces in our country’s battle against terrorism.

    To read more about this story, purchase a copy of the new book recently released by author Patrick Robinson, "Honor & Betrayal: The Untold Story of the Navy Seal Who Capture the 'Butcher of Fallujah' – and the Shameful Ordeal They Later Endured." Click to purchase your copy.

    More Details >>

  • NOT GUILTY Domestic Assault / Battery
    • Military Defense
    Navy Master Chief (E-9) with 23 years of service faced an Article 32 on four specifications of assault/battery on his wife (2 before marriage, 2 after marriage) as well as drunk and disorderly conduct. After the Article 32, the charges were referred to a Special Court-Martial. The evidence presented by the prosecution included a medical report noting multiple "contusions" as well as a recording approximately 10 mins in length of an argument between the accused and his wife, during which the wife testified that she was assaulted by her husband. At a trial with enlisted members, we quickly negated the medical records by getting the examining doctor to admit on cross-examination that other than the wife saying she hurt at the location of the reported contusions, there was no physical or medical evidence that in fact she had any injuries. As to the recording, which on its face was very damaging, we argued that the wife had effectively set up our client with the recording and that there was no physical assault. The prosecution also called the wife's best friend, as well as her mother, but on cross-examination we were able to substantially undercut the testimony of both witnesses so that they actually helped out our case more than the government's case. After about 5 hours of deliberation, the jury returned a verdict of NOT GUILTY on all charges.
  • Obtained General Discharge. Alcohol Incidents
    • Military Defense
    Frocked Navy E-4. Background includes difficult adolescence to include being expelled three times, and flunking out one time during four years of high school at three different schools, disclosure of and enlistment waiver for pre-service underage drinking and DUI and pre-service marijuana use. During first year in Navy, NJP for underage drinking and incapacitation for duty due to consumption of alcohol followed by disenrollment from Alcohol Rehabilitation Program. Our firm successfully challenged disenrollment and obtained retention on active duty. One year later sailor tests positive for cocaine during random urinalysis testing. De-frocked and reduced to E-2 at NJP and processed for administrative separation. After initially waiving Administrative Discharge Board (ADB) we were retained, were able to get case back before an ADB at which we avoided OTH and obtained General Discharge.
  • CAREER RETAINED Alcohol Incident
    • Military Defense
    O-6 Active Duty Physician recommended for Administrative Separation through "Board of Inquiry/Show Cause" procedures for poly-substance abuse (alcohol and prescription drugs); alcohol rehabilitation failure; Misconduct - Violation of UCMJ Art. 86: Unauthorized Absence for 3 days and Unauthorized Absence for 7 days; Art. 133: Conduct Unbecoming an Officer; and, Art. 134: Drunkenness; as well as Substandard Performance of Duty and Failure to comport with expected standards for an officer of that grade and experience. Case determined by panel composed of three Flag/General Officers with final recommendation for Retention in the Military.
  • CAREER RETAINED Alcohol Incident
    • Military Defense
    Naval aviator faced a Show Cause Board of Inquiry and possible OTH characterization of discharge for charges related to an alcohol incident involving comments of a sexual nature toward a junior female officer, as well as racial overtones towards a senior officer. Our client was RETAINED by the board.
  • CHARGES WITHDRAWN - NO MISCONDUCT Marijuana Distribution
    • Military Defense
    Navy Third Class Air Traffic Controller was charged with distribution of marijuana as a result of an undercover NCIS investigation in which the informant turned over to NCIS a bag of marijuana with our client's fingerprint on the bag. We secured a WITHDRAWAL of the Courts-Martial charges, and then when the case was sent to an Administrative Separation Board, we secured a finding of NO MISCONDUCT from the board.
  • NO CONFINEMENT & NO PUNITIVE DISCHARGE Distribution of Marijuana
    • Military Defense
    A Navy Second Class was implicated in an undercover drug operation which involved allegations of distribution of marijuana, introduction of marijuana on a Naval installation, and distribution of one joint. Although the case was initially headed to a General Courts-Martial, we were able to negotiate a deal for referral to a Special Courts-Martial, with dismissal of all charges except distribution. Our pre-trial agreement provided for a confinement cap of 90 days, but at trial we were able to secure a sentence involving reduction in pay grade, with NO CONFINEMENT and NO PUNITIVE DISCHARGE.
  • RETAINS CAREER Drug Use Charge
    • Military Defense
    An Administrative Separation Board recommended discharge for a Navy E-6, with over 18 years of service, for Misconduct, Drug Abuse (Amphetamines). We challenged the results of the board and had it set aside based on improper constitution of the board. Thereafter we secured a finding of NO MISCONDUCT at the new board allowing this sailor to continue his career towards retirement eligibility.
  • ACQUITTED Drug Use
    • Military Defense
    An E-5 in the Air Force faced a General Courts-Martial for use of cocaine. Prior to trial, the Government preferred an additional charge related to BAH fraud. We secured a WITHDRAWAL of the fraud charge after the Art. 32, then when we went to trial on the drug charge, our client was ACQUITTED. We secured the acquittal without putting on any evidence in our case.
  • NO MISCONDUCT Drug Use With Questionable Company
    • Military Defense
    Naval reservist doing his two weeks of annual training overseas was interrogated about spending time with a questionable foreign national female. The reservist admitted to being with the female when she smoked marijuana, but insisted he did not use any drugs. He consented to provide a urine sample, which came up positive for cocaine. The reservist was taken to Mast for use of cocaine, was reduced in pay-grade and referred to an Administrative Separation Board. At the Board, we secured a NO MISCONDUCT finding.
  • Discharged In Lieu of Drug Charges Drug Charges
    • Military Defense
    Army Warrant Officer was charged with AWOL, as well as use of drugs. We submitted a request for discharge in lieu of Courts-Martial, however the command refused to accept that and referred the charges to a General Courts-Martial. On the first day of trial we were able to secure a delay due to some procedural problems with the charges, at which time we then resubmitted the request for discharge in lieu of trial and were able to get it approved.
  • CHARGES WITHDRAWN Air Force Officer Accused of Drug Use
    • Military Defense
    A senior Air Force officer who was a department head was charged with use of a controlled substance. Our client was offered NJP, however upon our advice, he refused to accept NJP and demanded Courts-Martial. The charge was WITHDRAWN one week prior to the Art. 32 Investigation.
  • CHARGES DISMISSED Prescription Fraud Incidents
    • Military Defense
    Air Force officer was charged with three felony offenses in state court related to prescription fraud. We secured a withdrawal of one of the felony charges in one city, as well as a withdrawal of another felony charge in a second city. We negotiated an agreement as to the third felony charge to have the remaining charge reduced to a misdemeanor after a year of probation. Upon our return to court after the passing of one year, we secured an outright DISMISSAL of the charge over the prosecutor's objection. Our client's military records were not affected and he was recommended for promotion.
  • CHARGES WITHDRAWN Navy Officer Accused of Numerous Offenses
    • Military Defense
    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 Courts-Martial, civilian authorities then charged our client with multiple felony counts of prescription fraud. Tasked by our client to do all we could do to save his career and retirement, we were able to do so by negotiating a PTA that protected him against dismissal, and thereafter secured a sentence that did not include a dismissal. We were also able to secure a WITHDRAWAL of all civilian charges.
  • NO MISCONDUCT - SERVICE RETAINED Alleged Drug Use
    • Military Defense
    Active Duty O-5, U.S. Navy/Medical Corps, required to show cause for retention before a Board of Inquiry for misconduct (wrongful use of a controlled substance - cocaine), and substandard performance of duty. Our representation resulted in the Board of Inquiry finding 3-0 NO MISCONDUCT, and no substandard performance of duty -- officer RETAINED.
  • NO MISCONDUCT Wrongful Use of Prescription Drugs
    • Military Defense
    Navy SEAL had accepted NJP for wrongful use of prescription drugs. As would be expected, he was found guilty at NJP and referred to an administrative separation board. Prior to the board, we had our client take a polygraph test, which he passed as to the issue of unknowing use of the drug. The command refused to drop the accusations. At the administrative separation board, we secured a 3-0 vote of NO MISCONDUCT.
  • HONORABLE DISCHARGE GRANTED DRUG USE
    • Military Defense

    Wrongful Use of Cocaine - HONORABLE DISCHARGE GRANTED

    Navy SEAL with excellent service record admitted wrongful use of cocaine. Realizing his career with the special warfare community was over due to the drug use, the focus at that point was to secure the best characterization of service upon discharge. At the administrative separation board, the government counsel argued that he should receive a General under Honorable condition discharge characterization and firmly took the position that an Honorable discharge was not appropriate due to the drug use. After presentation of our case, including not only presenting his outstanding service record, but also four character witnesses, the board voted 3-0 to grant him an HONORABLE discharge

  • Granting relief Drug Abuse
    • Military Defense
    E-5 tested positive for amphetamines during command unit sweep and separated for Misconduct - Drug Abuse. Petition filed with Board for Correction of Military Record based upon flawed chain of custody; improper changes being made to batch and specimen numbers after the fact; coordinator and observer submitting their own samples in this testing and having access to their own specimens. Board granted full relief to include setting aside of Misconduct Discharge, revising discharge date to date of Board's approved decision, Honorable Discharge, RE-1 reenlistment code and eligibility for back pay from date of initial separation to date of approved Board decision granting relief
  • ACQUITTAL Positive urinalysis
    • Military Defense
    An Air Force E-6 with 19 ½ years of service retained us to represent her for a positive urinalysis. The military attorney had recommended our client accept NJP. We advised our client to refuse NJP and demand Courts-Martial, which she did. At trial, we secured an ACQUITTAL without putting on any evidence, relying upon significant irregularities we were able to establish existed at the Air Force drug-testing lab.
  • Still Able To RETIRE From Navy Positive on a urinalysis
    • Military Defense
    Navy E-7 with over 19 years of service came up positive on a urinalysis and ADMITTED USE OF THE DRUG. At the separation board, a 2-1 vote resulted in a recommendation that our client be discharged. We continued in our efforts to get this Chief retired. Although we were able to secure a recommendation from the Commanding Office that our client should be allowed to retire, PERS refused to do so and the Assistant Sectary of Navy ordered our client to be discharged. Again we could have stopped there – but did not do so. Through our cumulative efforts to delay the processing of the case, we were able to limp our client over the 20 year mark so that our client was able to RETIRE from the Navy.
  • NO MISCONDUCT Positive for cocaine
    • Military Defense
    Navy E-5 tested positive for cocaine and refused NJP. In our preparation for Courts-Marital, numerous problems were discovered which seriously increased the risk of conviction, confinement and punitive discharge in a Courts-Marital. Upon our advice, our client requested that the case be returned to NJP, with the intent to thereafter litigate the case at a separation board. At the board, all of the problems were disclosed to the board and we secured a NO MISCONDUCT finding from the board.
  • NO MISCONDUCT Positive Pot Result
    • Military Defense
    Navy E-7 tested positive for marijuana and before he retained our services, requested to take a NCIS polygraph. Despite the fact that the NCIS polygraph examiner testified that our client was in his opinion deceptive on the polygraph, we secured a finding of NO MISCONDUCT at the Board.
  • REINSTATED INTO THE NAVY AND RETIRED Positive urinalysis
    • Military Defense
    A Navy E-6 with 19 years of service came to us after he had been 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.
  • Able To Retire Positive urinalysis for cocaine.
    • Military Defense
    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 came up POSITIVE A THIRD TIME for cocaine. The command was understandably not at all inclined to allow our client to retire after THREE POSITIVE URINALYSIS in 3 years. Because the second case went to an Administrative Separation Board, no "double jeopardy" applied even though we beat that charge, so the command referred the second use charge to the Court-Martial. We eventually negotiated a PTA where the second urinalysis charge was withdrawn, and our client "stipulated" to the evidence on the third charge, with an agreement that protected our client from confinement, but exposed him to a BCD and loss of retirement. At the sentencing hearing, we secured a sentence of a one pay grade reduction and no punitive discharge, so our client was ABLE TO RETIRE.
  • NO MISCONDUCT Another Two-Time Failure
    • Military Defense
    A Navy Warrant Officer with 24 years of service came up positive for marijuana on a urinalysis. Upon our advice, our client refused NJP. While we were waiting for the Show Cause Board to convene, our client came up POSITIVE FOR MARIJUANA A SECOND TIME. Both allegations were presented before the Board, where we obtained a NO MISCONDUCT result.
  • CAREER RETAINED Positive urinalysis
    • Military Defense
    A Navy first class was charged with a positive urinalysis. Upon our advice, the sailor refused NJP and demanded Courts-Martial, however several days prior to the trial, the command withdrew the charges and took our client directly to an Administrative Separation Board. At the board, we established clear violations of the regulation related to collection of urine samples; however the board still found that misconduct occurred and recommended he be discharged with a General Discharge. Subsequent to the board, we immediately filed complaints with numerous Naval agencies as to the irregularities involved in the collection process. The complaints apparently went unheeded and discharge orders were issued. We immediately submitted additional complaints and several days before the discharge date, the Naval Personnel Command ordered that the service member be RETAINED and the misconduct finding be SET ASIDE due to the irregularities we had established at the board.
  • Record Cleared Positive urinalysis
    • Military Defense
    A Navy SEAL first class petty officer was charged with a positive urinalysis. When we appeared before a separation board, the board recommended separation, although the discharge characterization was a General under Honorable conditions. After the board, we filed a petition for review before the Board of Corrections. After nearly 2 1/2 years of ongoing legal maneuvering, the Board of Corrections found in our favor and REVERSED the finding of misconduct. The Navy thereafter gave the sailor CREDIT FOR PAY PURPOSES for all time since he had been discharged and RETAINED him with full retirement pay and benefits, as well as CLEARED HIS RECORD of any reference to the alleged drug usage.
  • CHARGES WITHDRAWN Positive for marijuana
    • Military Defense
    Air Force E-6 with over 18 years of service was admitted to a civilian hospital. During her hospital stay, she allegedly tested positive for marijuana. Her command issued her a Letter of Reprimand (LOR), established an Unfavorable Information File (UIF), and initiated a separation action against her. Without even needing a board hearing, we were able to convince her command that the positive urinalysis was unreliable, that the LOR and UIF should be rescinded, and that separation action processing should cease immediately.
  • NOT GUILTY Positive urinalysis
    • Military Defense
    A Marine officer with 22 years of outstanding service was charged with a positive urinalysis. A Marine jury found our client NOT GUILTY.
  • NO MISCONDUCT Positive on a urinalysis for cocaine
    • Military Defense
    A Nevada National Guard officer came up positive on a urinalysis for cocaine. After an extended hearing where grossly irregular procedures were shown to have occurred in the collection process, the board found that the officer DID NOT COMMIT MISCONDUCT.
  • ACQUITTED Positive Cocaine Test
    • Military Defense
    Navy E-7 charged with use of cocaine as a result of a positive urinalysis. Because our client had over 20 years of service, the command refused to handle the case at NJP and insisted the case proceed to courts-martial. At trial, our client was ACQUITTED.
  • NOT GUILTY Positive for marijuana
    • Military Defense
    Navy Lieutenant JG (registered nurse) reported to his first command after commissioning as Naval Officer and came up positive for marijuana on his check-in urinalysis. Officer jury found him NOT GUILTY.
  • NO MISCONDUCT Positive urinalysis for cocaine.
    • Military Defense
    E-6 reduced in rate to E-5 at NJP and then processed for administrative separation as result of unit sweep positive urinalysis for cocaine. Numerous irregularities in collection process demonstrated to include untrained observers, loss of control of individual samples and defective chain of custody resulting in unanimous finding of NO MISCONDUCT.
  • DID NOT COMMIT MISCONDUCT. Positive on a urinalysis for cocaine
    • Military Defense
    A Navy E-7 came up positive on a urinalysis for cocaine. Due to problems with the case and his service record, it was recommended that the client not take the case to Courts-Martial, but that it be returned to Mast. After Mast, client was taken to an Administrative Separation Board, where after two complete panels were disqualified, the third panel found that the client DID NOT COMMIT MISCONDUCT.
  • Two Time Failure - NO MISCONDUCT Charged with using cocaine
    • Military Defense
    Navy E-4 was charged with using cocaine and was ACQUITTED of the charge by an officer jury. Approximately eighteen months later, the client came up POSITIVE AGAIN on another urinalysis for cocaine, and this time the command took her to an Administrative Separation Board after she refused Mast. The separation board found that she DID NOT COMMIT MISCONDUCT.
  • Receives Payment From Inconsistency Separated by an Administrative Separation Board
    • Military Defense
    A former Navy First Class who had been taken to Mast and separated by an Administrative Separation Board for a positive urinalysis, came to us to assist in his efforts to maintain an action against the Navy for his case. Finding an inconsistency between a Department of Defense regulation and a Naval instruction, we filed suit in Federal Court. The Government offered to settle the case prior to trial for a financial payment which the client accepted.
  • RETAIN SERVICE Navy Man To RETAIN SERVICE Despite Multiple DUI Charges
    • Military Defense
    Navy E-6 with 18 ½ years of service was processed for misconduct based upon 3 convictions for driving under the influence. At an Administrative Separation Board, we secured a recommendation that the separation be suspended, however the command was adamant that our client be separated. Through continued representation after the board, we were able to get the Naval Personnel command to RETAIN our client so that he will be able to retire.
  • WITHDRAWAL Air Force E-6 CHARGES WITHDRAWN In Compromising of Materials Charge
    • Military Defense

    An E-6 in the Air Force was charged with offenses related to compromising of performance testing materials. After an ART. 32 Investigation, the charges were referred to trial by General Courts-Martial, however we secured WITHDRAWAL of the charges prior to the trial.

  • RETAINED E-6 Reservist RETAINED SERVICE After Charges
    • Military Defense
    E-6 Reservist, with 15 years of service, living overseas charged with improper registration of POV through tax-free on-base MVRO as well as multiple specifications of improper purchase of tax-free items through Exchange System when no longer eligible as result of demobilization. By unanimous vote of Administrative Separation Board our client was RETAINED and permitted to continue career toward achieving retirement eligibility.
  • ACQUITTED Air Force E-5 ACQUITTED Of Drug and Fraud Charges
    • Military Defense
    An E-5 in the Air Force faced a General Courts-Martial for use of cocaine. Prior to trial, the Government preferred an additional charge related to BAH fraud. We secured a withdrawal of the fraud charge after the Art. 32, then when we went to trial on the drug charge, our client was ACQUITTED. We secured the acquittal without putting on any evidence in our case.
  • DID NOT INCLUDE ANY CONFINEMENT AT ALL Navy Man Avoids Confinement in Kick-Back Scandal
    • Military Defense
    Navy E-6 was implicated in an investigation concerning the theft of military property which evolved from a kick-back scandal with civilian suppliers. Our client was the supervisor of the person who was stealing the property and eventually became embroiled in conspiracies to wrongfully dispose of the property and obstruction of justice. Through extended pre-trial negotiations, we secured a pre-trial agreement which resulted in about half of the charges being dismissed and limiting confinement to 9 months. At the sentencing hearing, we secured a sentence from the military judge that DID NOT INCLUDE ANY CONFINEMENT AT ALL.
  • NOT GUILTY Navy CWO Found NOT GUILTY Of Theft
    • Military Defense
    Navy Chief Warrant Officer was charged with assorted violations of the UCMJ related to alleged theft of government computer equipment from DRMO. Client had 20+ years of service and was advised of the charges the day before his retirement ceremony. Two co-defendants implicated the client as having received stolen government property. Client was found NOT GUILTY of all charges by the jury and retired the following week.
  • PROMOTED TO MASTER SERGEANT E-6 Promoted Despite Forgery Accusation
    • Military Defense
    USAF E-6 with 13 years of service reduced in rate to E-5 at NJP for forgery of superior NCO's signature on a performance of duty report form. Service member had a previous incident related to questions on TAD travel expense claims. We were able to secure a "SET ASIDE" OF NJP, restoring client to previous status as E-6 and, one year later, client PROMOTED TO MASTER SERGEANT.
  • WITHDRAWN Army Warrant Officer Avoids Dereliction of Duty Charge
    • Military Defense
    An Army Warrant Officer who was the Commander of a small vessel was charged with several counts of dereliction of duty and other charges related to the discharge of several hundred gallons of fuel oil into local waterways. After the Article 32 Investigation, the charges were WITHDRAWN.
  • Avoids Punitive Dismissal Naval Officer Avoids Punitive Dismissal
    • Military Defense
    Naval officer was implicated in offenses related to conspiracy to commit larceny and sale of military property, as well as hazing of a junior enlisted member and falsification of personnel records. After extended pre-trial negotiations, we secured a plea agreement where the majority of the charges were dismissed and our client was given protection as to imposition of a punitive dismissal or confinement if he submitted a resignation request.
  • NO PUNISHMENT Death Of Navy Seal
    • Military Defense
    Navy E-7 was taken to a courts-martial where a Guilty plea was entered on one specification of Dereliction of Duty in a case involving the shooting death of a Navy SEAL. An enlisted jury returned a sentence of NO PUNISHMENT.
  • WAS NOT SENTENCED TO BE PUNITIVELY DISCHARGED Navy E-7 Avoids Being Punitively Discharged
    • Military Defense
    Navy E-7 was charged with conspiracy and theft of assorted government property, all of which was recovered from his garage. We negotiated a plea agreement that significantly limited our client’s exposure at trial, and then secured a sentence of only 30 days of confinement, reprimand, and reduction to the pay grade of E-5. Our client WAS NOT SENTENCED TO BE PUNITIVELY DISCHARGED.
  • NO MISCONDUCT. Positive for amphetamines and methamphetamines
    • Military Defense
    E-6 tested positive for amphetamines and methamphetamines during random urinalysis. At the administrative separation board, we contested authority of the Urinalysis Program Coordinator (no letter of designation, inadequate supervision while in training) as well as defects in collection procedures and chain-of-custody and discrepancies between what Coordinator(s) said occurred and what participants in urinalysis said occurred, resulting in finding of NO MISCONDUCT.
  • NO DISCHARGE; RETAINS RETIREMENT BENEFITS Navy E-8 Charged With Larceny
    • Military Defense
    Navy E-8 with well in excess of 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 many checks from the Chief's fund payable directly to himself and used for his personal expenses. We were able to negotiate a plea agreement that provided for partial restitution of the stolen funds, and a sentencing cap to limit his confinement, but still exposed him to a punitive discharge and resultant loss of his retirement benefits. After our plea agreement was accepted, the Government counsel argued for a lengthy period of confinement, and pressed hard to secure a punitive discharge. We asked for a reduction to an intermediate pay grade, no discharge and 89 days of confinement. The judge reduced our client to E-3, gave him 89 days of confinement, and DID NOT DISCHARGEhim. Our client has RETIRED FROM THE NAVY.
  • CHARGES DISMISSED Alleged Theft
    • Military Defense
    Our client, a Navy man with over 12 years of active service, was charged with stealing materials from a major hardware store. He plead not guilty to the charge of petty larceny at trial. The store’s loss prevention manager testified that he saw our client leave the store without paying. Our attorney argued that it was a misunderstanding and that another individual was supposed to pay before leaving the store. The judge decided to impose a deferred finding and ordered that the charge be DISMISSED after six months if he commits no further criminal offenses during this time.
  • NO MISCONDUCT Positive Test For LSD
    • Military Defense
    A junior Navy seaman was apprehended for drunk and disorderly conduct after a "friend" who was an informant advised security that our client had taken LSD. Our client was directed to take a urinalysis test and his urine tested positive for LSD. At the separation board, the informant also testified he saw our client use LSD two weeks earlier. The Board found that our client DID NOT COMMIT MISCONDUCT.
  • CHARGES WITHDRAWN Naval Officer Accused of Larceny
    • Military Defense
    Naval officer was charged with larceny of U.S. currency of a value of about $24,497.00, the property of the United States Treasury related to allegations of BAH fraud. Additionally - in connection with that charge, he was charged with signing an official document, on three separate occasions, stating that his wife was living at another residence. Prior to trial by General Court-Martial, we had our client take a civilian polygraph test on the issue of whether or not he knew the actual place of residence of his wife, which he passed. We then were able to get the command to approve a NCIS polygraph, which we were present for - he also passed that polygraph. The command still refused to dismiss the charges although our client offered to repay over $ 20,000, so we then had to secure affidavits from his wife, as well as a male acquaintance, to support our client's position. After extensive negotiations, ALL CHARGES WERE WITHDRAWN.
  • ACQUITTED Positive Marijuana Test
    • Military Defense
    Navy E-6 with over 19 years of service was charged with wrongful use of marijuana. We advised our client to refuse NJP and demand trial by court martial. At a trial with members, Mr. McCormack's cross examination of the urinalysis coordinator resulted in the witness admitting she was derelict in the performance of her duties. The cross examination of that witness, as well as the lab expert went so well that our client presented no evidence and we rested our case. An ACQUITTAL was returned shortly after the jury started deliberations.
  • Allowed To Retire From The Army Army E-7 Receives Lesser Punishment for Larceny Charges
    • Military Defense

    Army E-7 charged with 17 offenses related to alleged theft of a large quantity of Meals Ready to Eat, to include a second charge of larceny of MRE's which were allegedly traded for a used car, several specifications of obstruction of justice, as well as wrongful appropriation, dereliction of duty, disobeying a lawful order and false official statement to a CID agent. All efforts to reach an alternate disposition failed and the case proceeded to a fully contested trial with members. We were able to secure dismissal of several specifications during the course of the trial and although the members found our client not guilty of the larceny offenses, he was convicted of negligent dereliction of duty, obstruction of justice, wrongful appropriation and false official statement to the CID agent.

    At the sentencing hearing, the prosecution argued that our client lost his right to be a NCO and asked that the jury separate our client from the Army with a Dishonorable Discharge. Our client was sentenced to a one grade reduction to E-6, a reprimand, and a forfeiture of less than a thousand dollars a month for 6 months. The sentence will permit our client to remain in the service and to retire from the Army.

  • DISMISSED Army LTC Reservist Reduced Charges for Multiple Criminal Counts
    • Military Defense

    Army Lieutenant Colonel (0-5) reservist, with over 20 years of service, was implicated in a fraud investigation related to entitlements while on active duty. Our client was charged with 10 specifications of larceny, 9 specification of fraud against the US, 1 specification of false official statement, 1 specification of forgery, 2 specifications of violation of a general regulations and 1 specification of conduct unbecoming an officer. Due to some factors in the case, avoiding trial by court-martial was crucially important to our client, as well as trying to salvage our client’s retirement.

    In a very unusual tactical move, Mr. McCormack set up a meeting with our client and the prosecutor prior to trial by General Court-Martial – the belief here was that we could show the prosecutor that proceeding to trial was not the appropriate move with our client. Shortly after that meeting, it was apparently that our tactical move was successful and we now had the prosecutor on board with attempting to avoid the case going to trial. Despite the fact that the immediate level of command and the prosecutor supported a request for a resignation in lieu of trial by court-martial, which if approved would have resulted in an other than honorable discharge, that request was eventually denied by the Department of the Army, which put us right back on track for going to the court-martial.

    In a continuing effort to avoid court-martial, Mr. McCormack thereafter negotiated an alternative resolution where the government agreed to DISMISS all charges and to terminate the court-martial proceedings upon our client accepting a General Officer Art. 15 on only 2 charge (1 specification of larceny and 1 specification of fraud). Our client appeared at the Art. 15, plead not guilty to the charges and was, as expected, found guilty by the General of both charges. Minor punishment was imposed, the court-martial charges were dismissed, and our client was thereafter permitted to retire from the Army without any criminal record whatsoever.

  • PROMOTED to the rank of Captain. Positive Test For Marijuana
    • Military Defense
    Army physician was reported positive for marijuana in his last semester of medical school. After the charge was preferred for Art. 32 Investigation, we negotiated disposition by an ART. 15, with the goal being to attempt to secure our client's graduation from medical school . Within a couple of weeks, our client was not only allowed to graduate from medical school and receive his medical degree, he was also PROMOTED to the rank of Captain.
  • DISMISSED Marine Granted Relief On Multiple Charges
    • Military Defense
    Active Duty Marine Corps E-3 was convicted by summary court-martial for violations of the UCMJ (larceny, attempt, false official statement, and unlawful entry). Upon application to the Judge Advocate General, pursuant to Article 69(b), UCMJ, the Judge Advocate General granted relief by disapproving all findings of guilt and sentence, and DISMISSED the charges.
  • Resignation in Lieu of Court-Martial Coast Guard Officer Avoids Jail
    • Military Defense
    Coast Guard junior officer was facing charges of larceny, fraud and false official statements related to false travel claims of a value of approximately $ 50,000.00. Upon receipt of the Report of Investigation, it was apparent that the evidence against our client was significant and had the case proceed through trial by General Court-Martial, he would have faced a federal conviction, most likely with a period of confinement and dismissal (equivalent to a Dishonorable Discharge) from the Coast Guard. We were able bring this to a resolution, before he was even charged, by securing approval of a Resignation in Lieu of Court-Martial.
  • Procedure Avoided Positive urinalysis
    • Military Defense
    Navy E-4 on a sea going command was taken to Mast for a positive urinalysis. At his separation board, it was determined that he DID NOT COMMIT MISCONDUCT. We were able to later get the command to SET ASIDE the Mast that had been previously imposed, and to restore his rank and lost pay.
  • CHARGES DISMISSED Navy E-7 Charged With Larceny
    • Military Defense
    Navy E-7 with 11+ years of service assigned on an aircraft carrier was charged with false official statement and larceny of over $7,000 related to an accusation of BAH fraud. The command elected to take him to NJP, which he could not refuse due to being assigned on a ship. We were able to secure a DISMISSAL of the charges after our client passed a civilian and NCIS polygraph.
  • Withdrawn & Vacated Favorable Result for Past Larceny
    • Military Defense
    Army Reserve O-5, recalled to active duty for charges preferred to trial by court-martial (violations of the UCMJ, while on active duty, Article 107, false official statement; Article 121, larceny of government money; and Article 132, false and fraudulent claim against the government). Through Mr. McCormack's representation, a resignation for the good of the service was negotiated (with restitution paid), submitted, and subsequently approved, by the Secretary of the Army. All court-martial charges were WITHDRAWN, and all court-martial proceedings VACATED.
  • Request for RILO was Approved Air Force Reservist Obtains RILO in Alleged Larceny Case
    • Military Defense
    Air Force O-4 reservist was ordered to active duty to face charges related to multiple counts of conduct unbecoming an officer concerning alleged larceny of AAFES funds through fraudulent returns, for full retail prices, of items purchased from the exchange at discount prices. Facing General Court-Martial, we submitted a RILO after the Art. 32 in an effort to secure an administrative separation in lieu of court-martial to avoid the risk of the conviction and sentence to include possible confinement and punitive discharge. Although it is extremely difficult to secure approval of a RILO in an officer case with the Air Force, our request for RILO was approved.
  • NO CONFINEMENT Navy E-5 dental technician admitted to stealing and selling dental gold on numerous occasions.
    • Military Defense
    Over a period of 2 years, approximately $ 36,000 worth of dental gold was stolen and sold by our client. Prior to trial, we secured a plea agreement where all confinement in excess of 8 months would be suspended. At the trial, we secured a sentence that included NO CONFINEMENT.
  • Avoids Discipline Positive on a urinalysis.
    • Military Defense
    Army officer was reported as positive on a urinalysis. Upon our advice, he refused NJP and demanded Courts-Martial. The command elected to give our client a Letter of Reprimand and directed that he appear before a Show Cause Board. We were able to delay the proceedings for several months, getting the client beyond the expiration date of his service obligation. The Army was forced to release our client from active duty without taking any further action against him.
  • BAH and Travel Fraud Charges
    We have seen a recent surge in investigative activity, and prosecution of charges related to alleged false BAH and Travel Claims. Due to the variation as to entitlements for BAH based on the location in which dependents live, active duty military personnel are facing charges related to allegations of submission of false claims for BAH entitlements which can involve significant amounts of money. With the extensive mobilization of reservists, travel and housing claims are also a major problem that reservists called to active duty may have to deal with. On many occasions, active duty personnel and reservists find themselves facing criminal charges related to allegations of false claims. While cases can involve intentional acts to defraud the Government, we are frequently seeing reservists who truly believe that they have done nothing wrong, only to find out that they did not understand the complex rules that must be followed regarding these claims. The end result is that the reservists who are called to active duty on short notice, willing to serve our country in the war on terrorism, can end up facing serious criminal charges in Courts-Martial that can result in federal convictions, jail time and punitive discharge, with the devastating consequences flowing over into their civilian occupation on many occasions. Active duty personnel in this situation can also face prosecution and the resultant consequences which may inevitably lead to the end of their career, in addition to the federal convictions and jail time. Our office has defended numerous active duty personnel and reservists in fraud claims and we will aggressively assist you in an effort to secure the best possible result.
  • Avoids Discipline Positive on a urinalysis.
    • Military Defense
    Army officer was reported as positive on a urinalysis. Upon our advice, he refused NJP and demanded Courts-Martial. The command elected to give our client a Letter of Reprimand and directed that he appear before a Show Cause Board. We were able to delay the proceedings for several months, getting the client beyond the expiration date of his service obligation. The Army was forced to release our client from active duty without taking any further action against him.
  • NAVAL OFFICER RETAINED Administrative Separation NAVAL OFFICER RETAINED
    • Military Defense
    Navy LCDR with 18+ years of active duty went to NJP for willful dereliction of duty for ordering subordinate to falsely certify civilian pay records, as well as conduct unbecoming an officer for using profanity and abusive language towards civilian employees. At his Show Cause Board of Inquiry, we presented overwhelming evidence to support retention of the officer so that he could retire. The board voted 3-0 to RETAIN our client.
  • NO MISCONDUCT Multiple Test Positives For Marijuana
    • Military Defense
    Navy E-7 was court-martialed for a positive urinalysis for marijuana in 1997. After establishing significant irregularities with the collection process, we rested our case without presenting any defense evidence. An officer jury returned a verdict of NOT GUILTY. In 2001, our client, who was still at the same command, came up POSITIVE A SECOND TIME FOR MARIJUANA. Upon our advice, our client refused NJP and we secured a NO MISCONDUCT finding at an Administrative Separation Board.
  • ADMINISTRATIVE DISCHARGE Navy Commander Avoids Court -Martial In Espionage Case
    • Military Defense
    Navy Commander charged with espionage-related offenses. After the Article 32 Investigation, we were able to secure the ADMINISTRATIVE DISCHARGE OF OUR CLIENT WITHOUT A COURT-MARTIAL.
  • NO PUNISHMENT Navy E-7 Cleared In Disclosure of Classified Information Case
    • Military Defense
    Navy E-7 with over 20 years of service was investigated by federal and military authorities for alleged violation of the National Security laws involving alleged unlawful disclosure of classified information. After nearly two years of joint FBI and NCIS investigative effort, our client was charged with numerous National Security offenses before a General Courts-Martial. After extensive discovery and litigation, the Government conceded the case. All charges were WITHDRAWN and the Client thereafter retired from the Navy. We previously represented this client in a courts-martial where a Guilty plea was entered on one specification of Dereliction of Duty in a case involving the shooting death of a Navy SEAL. An enlisted jury returned a sentence of NO PUNISHMENT. A subsequent Administrative Separation Board returned a RETENTION recommendation, and extensive efforts by the command to separate our client thereafter were stopped at the office of the Assistant Secretary of Navy.
  • NOT GUILTY Multiple Test Positives For Cocaine
    • Military Defense
    Navy E-6 was court-martialed for a positive urinalysis for cocaine. The officer jury returned a verdict of NOT GUILTY. Several months later, the same client came up positive on another urinalysis for cocaine and a second Courts-Martial was convened. Before the case got to trial, the client came up POSITIVE ON A THIRD URINALYSIS FOR COCAINE, and an additional charge was referred for that alleged use. The second Courts-Martial for the two separate urinalysis resulted in a finding of NOT GUILTY to both specifications.
  • NOT GUILTY - NO MISCONDUCT Navy E-6 Tests Positive For Cocaine
    • Military Defense
    Navy E-6 came up positive for cocaine on a urinalysis. Prior to his trial, he came up POSITIVE ON A SECOND URINALYSIS while undergoing an "aftercare" program. He was found NOT GUILTY of the first urinalysis by an officer jury (after we advised the jury of the second positive urinalysis to cut off the prosecutor from doing so first). Several weeks later, we appeared before an Administrative Separation Board on the second urinalysis, which found that he DID NOT COMMIT MISCONDUCT.
  • NO MISCONDUCT Positive Test For Cocaine
    • Military Defense
    Navy E-6 tested positive for cocaine on a random urinalysis test. At his Ad Sep board, we successfully demonstrated numerous errors with the testing program and convinced the member panel that NO MISCONDUCT occurred.
  • NO MISCONDUCT - CAREER RETAINED Positive Test For Cocaine
    • Military Defense
    An Air National Guard E-6 with 17 years of service tested positive for cocaine. Our client denied ever using cocaine, and turned down the government's offer of a general discharge. At the subsequent administrative separation board, we presented evidence that someone could have placed cocaine in her drink without her knowledge. We also presented testimony from an expert toxicologist, who confirmed that the level at which our client tested positive was consistent with unknowing ingestion. The board found NO MISCONDUCT and RETAINED our client in the Air National Guard.
  • CHARGES ACQUITTED Positive Test For Marijuana
    • Military Defense
    Air Force officer (O-3E) with over 18 years of service faced a General Court-Martial for two specifications of wrongful use of marijuana, based upon two separate positive urinalysis. Although our client passed two polygraphs, one of which was by OSI, the command refused to withdraw the charges. At trial, we acknowledged that our client did in fact have marijuana in his system on both occasions and we did not challenge the collection or laboratory process. In our case, we presented evidence of unknowing ingestion of marijuana by smoking cigars that had been laced with marijuana. Without putting our client on the witness stand, we secured an ACQUITTAL of both charges by the jury.
  • CAREER RETAINED Alleged Use of Cocaine
    • Military Defense

    Navy E-5, with over 12 years of military service tested positive for cocaine, but was not notified of positive urinalysis until 9 months later during her security clearance reinvestigation. Our client passed a civilian polygraph, yet the command refused our request for her to take a NCIS polygraph. At her Special Court-Martial, we presented definitive evidence that she could have unknowingly ingested cocaine by someone putting cocaine in her soda when 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 (SPCM). She was reduced in rate two pay grades, but was retained. After trial, we again requested that the command permit her to take a NCIS polygraph which was again denied.

    At her subsequent administrative separation board, evidence was again presented that she could have unknowingly ingested cocaine at her civilian job. As a result, the members found misconduct, but voted 3-0 toRETAIN her in the U.S. Navy. BUPERS upheld the decision to retain our client. On appeal of her case to the General Court-Martial convening authority, we addressed the fact that she had not been allowed to take a NCIS polygraph examination. Upon review, the SJA agreed to allow an NCIS polygraph, which our client passed. The command still refused to set aside the conviction. Our client was quickly approaching her EAOS and faced mandatory separation due her reduced pay grade. After extensive efforts in working with the SJA, the General Court-Martial convening authority agreed to set aside the conviction, resulting in her pay grade being reinstated, with all pay and allowances that she lost being paid back to her. Our client is now continuing what has been an outstanding career in the Navy.

  • NO MISCONDUCT - CAREER RETAINED Navy Seal Alleged Positive Test For Cocaine
    • Military Defense
    Navy SEAL was treated in a civilian hospital for severe medical injuries. During his medical treatment, a laboratory report reflected he had cocaine in his system. Our client’s command was made aware of the lab test, and issued a search authorization for collection of urine. Although our client was unconscious at the time the urine was collected from the command, the urine was tested by the Military drug screening laboratory and reported back to the command as positive for cocaine. At the administrative discharge board, we presented evidence as to the issue of unknowing ingestion and good military character –the board, after a 5 minute deliberation, found in our client’s favor, that he had not committed misconduct. Our client will be returned to full duty with his SEAL team.
  • NO MISCONDUCT Alleged Positive Test For Amphetamines
    • Military Defense
    Navy 02-E with 15 years of service was reported positive on a command sweep urinalysis for d-amphetamine. At the Show Cause Board of Inquiry, we established significant problems with the collection process. The board voted 3-0 for NO MISCONDUCT.
  • HONORABLE DISCHARGE POSITIVE DRUG TEST URINALYSIS
    • Military Defense

    Navy Master at Arms Chief Petty Officer (E-7) with over 19 years of service came up positive on a urinalysis for marijuana. During the course of the investigation our client made a statement to NCIS admitting to the wrongful use of marijuana. At a Special Court-Martial, although we prevailed on a Motion to Suppress that statement to NCIS, the case was still proceeding to trial. With the chance of securing an acquittal being very remote due to other evidence we were facing, we were finally able to secure the command’s agreement to take the case to a Summary Court-Martial where our client plead Guilty to the wrongful use of marijuana, at which time he was sentenced to be reduced to pay grade E-6, forfeitures of pay and 45 days of restriction. Upon submission of a clemency request, we were able to get the command to suspend the 45 days of restriction. Seven months prior to our client reaching the 20 year mark for retirement, the command initiated administrative separation proceedings – at the separation board, our client again admitted the wrongful use of marijuana – the board recommended that his separation be suspended for 6 months, and that upon discharge, that our client receive an HONORABLE DISCHARGE certificate.

  • Honorable Discharge Disenrollment from NROTC Program
    • Military Defense
    SFC, USMC, seeking an officer commission, was subject to disenrollment from NROTC Program due to physical disqualifications, and sought voluntary separation. SFC was returned to enlisted status and ordered back to active duty. Through the Law Firm of McCormack and McCormack and his staff's representation, SFC received an honorable discharge from the USMC.
  • RELEASE FROM THE ACTIVE DUTY Ordered to serve on active duty
    • Military Defense
    Army ROTC student was terminated from the ROTC program and upon graduation from college, was ordered to serve on active duty in an enlisted status. We secured a RELEASE FROM THE ACTIVE DUTY OBLIGATION.
  • Successful Release Due To Medical Reasons Disenrolled from the ROTC program
    • Military Defense
    Army ROTC student was ordered to active duty after being disenrolled from the ROTC program. Our client had attempted to secure her release for medical reasons, but her request was denied. We were able to accumulate the requisite records and to secure our client’s RELEASE FROM HER ACTIVE DUTY OBLIGATION.
  • Educational Expense Recoupment Unfit for commissioning
    • Military Defense
    Navy ROTC cadet upon completion of her 4 year degree was found unfit for commissioning in the restricted or unrestricted line and disenrollment procedures were initiated. 9 months later it was determined that her condition could now be waived and she was offered a commission in the restricted line. Client refused to accept a commission in the restricted line and was notified by DFAS that they were recouping all of the educational expenses. Greg McCormack's office became involved and uncovered information that showed the client had never been notified of any waiver process and that her condition was considered fully waiverable with no recoupment. Final decision was made by the SECNAV's office that client's full educational recoupment be waived and that her condition be listed as not waiverable in any respects.
  • Honorable Discharge Retention action due to homosexuality
    • Military Defense
    Active Duty Air Force O-3 was subject to show cause for retention action due to homosexuality, with an Other Than Honorable characterization of service. Through our efforts, the officer was ultimately allowed to resign in lieu of show cause proceedings, with an Honorable discharge.
  • Honorable Discharge Don't Ask - Don't Tell
    • Military Defense
    Navy reservist was notified of mobilization. We secured an administrative discharge based upon homosexuality, with an HONORABLE DISCHARGE CERTIFICATE.
  • Secures Grade and Career General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand
    • Military Defense

    Army medical services officer was given a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand, relief for cause and adverse OER as a result of an AR 15-6 investigation after a complaint of sexual harassment of a subordinate officer and a civilian employee, as well as falsification of patient records. Upon receiving notification that he would have to appear before a show cause board of inquiry, he retained our firm to represent him in an effort to save his retirement.

    On the day of the BOI, we asked for a delay as a result of late notification of witnesses to be called by the Government, as well as late notification of the intention to present evidence as to alleged misconduct at his last 2 prior commands - that request was granted. Immediately after the continuance was granted, the Government served our client with notice that the additional alleged misconduct at his prior commands would also be considered by the BOI Several days prior to the scheduled hearing, the Government disclosed that another 15-6 investigation had been conducted, and although the report was not finalized, they intended to use the findings and statements obtained in that 15-6 against our client.

    The night before the hearing, the Government counsel provided numerous documents to us for the first time, advising of the intention to use those documents at the hearing. On the morning of the hearing, we argued that the Government again failed to provide sufficient notice to our client of the additional 15-6 investigation, as well as its intention to use the documents in question against our client. The president of the BOI, agreeing that the notice was not sufficient, indicated that he would bifurcate the proceedings, with the intention to proceed on that date with the original evidence, but to also continue the hearing to a later date for presentation of the new evidence by the Government.

    After our extensive argument against that procedure, the president of the BOI finally accepted our position and directed that the BOI would proceed to completion that date, and that the “new” evidence obtained from the second 15-6 investigation could not be used by the Government. The Government called nine witnesses against our client, including a one star General, in an effort to separate our client from the Army, despite the fact that he had 19 years, 3 months of active duty, and more than 30 years of cumulative service with reserve time. The BOI returned findings that the evidence did not support the majority of the accusations, and recommended that our client be RETAINED in the Army with a rehabilitative transfer. Our client will now be able to complete his 20 years of active duty and retire in his current pay grade of 0-4.

  • Voluntary Retirement Retaining Rank Processed for "Elimination"
    • Military Defense
    Army COL Detached For Cause, Administratively Reprimanded, issued referred Officer Evaluation Report and processed for "Elimination" after being identified to show cause for retention based upon personal misconduct by engaging in an inappropriate relationship and conduct unbecoming. We were able to obtain a voluntary retirement in lieu of elimination, with retirement Grade Determination Review Board recommending, and the Secretary of the Army approving, retirement as a Colonel.
  • Military Grade For Retirement Detached for cause
    • Military Defense
    Active Duty Army O-5 issued Letter of Reprimand that was placed in Official Military Personnel File and detached for cause, with Referred OER, as result of allegations of multiple incidents occurring over an extended period of time and after consuming alcohol, to include inappropriate touching, obscene comments and vulgar suggestions to a number of officer and civilian personnel. Allegations and government response resulted in determination by the Officer Retirement Grade Determination Board. After consideration of response package prepared by our firm, officer was permitted to retire as an O-5.
  • Military Grade For Retirement Involuntary separation due to misconduct
    • Military Defense
    Reserve Air Force O-5 was subject to involuntary separation proceedings due to misconduct - successfully negotiated retirement in lieu of separation. The officer then faced a Retired Grade Determination, and was allowed to retire as an O-5.
  • Released from the remainder of his MSO. MSO Changed Due to Family Affairs
    • Military Defense
    Army PVT, completed active duty enlistment and transferred to the IRR as required to complete his Military Service Obligation (MSO). Received orders activating him and directing him to report for an 18 month deployment. Assisted client in submitting a delay and exemption package based on wife's mental health. Exemption from orders approved and client released from the remainder of his MSO.
  • Honorable Discharge LCPL, USMCR, with physical disqualifications
    • Military Defense
    LCPL, USMCR, with physical disqualifications, was subject to involuntary activation and administrative discharge proceedings, which could have resulted in characterization of service as Other Than Honorable (OTH). Through our representation, LCPL received an honorable discharge from the USMCR.
  • Discharge Record Court Martialed and separated with a Bad Conduct Discharge.
    • Military Defense
    USMC E-4 was Court Martialed and separated with a Bad Conduct Discharge. The Criminal Court of Appeals overturned his punitive discharge and he was released from the USMC at the end of his enlistment with a General characterization of service. However his narrative reason for separation was still listed as "as a result of Court Martial." Greg McCormack's office researched his records and all applicable instructions and petitioned the Discharge Review Board to correct the narrative reason for separation to properly reflect the manner in which he was separated. The Discharge Review Board voted 5-0 to change his narrative reason for separation from "as a result of court marital" to "End of obligated Service" thus removing any indication of any court martial proceeding or misconduct from his DD214.
  • Honorable Discharge Release For Military Physician
    • Military Defense
    Naval physician desired to be discharged after birth of a child. We secured HONORABLE DISCHARGE with no obligation to reimburse the Navy for her medical education paid for by the Navy.
  • Release For Military Physician Securing release
    • Military Defense
    Air Force physician retained us to assist in securing release from active duty. Though extensive efforts, we were able to secure an HONORABLE DISCHARGE for the doctor.
  • Honorable Discharge For Air Force Physician Resisted returning to her duties
    • Military Defense
    We were able to secure an HONORABLE DISCHARGE for an Air Force physician who experienced separation anxiety and initially resisted returning to her duties after the birth of her child.
  • Successful Mental Health Separation Diagnosed mental health disqualifications
    • Military Defense
    PV1, ARNG/USAR, with diagnosed mental health disqualifications, sought separation on his own without success. Through our representation, PV1 received uncharacterized/entry level discharge from the ARNG/USAR.
  • Secures Successful Resignation Single parent with full responsibility
    • Military Defense
    Navy O-3 on active duty was transferred to the West Coast, leaving her civilian husband and young daughter at home on the East Coast. While stationed on the West Coast, client gave birth to a second child and was functioning as a single parent with full responsibility for her young son. Upon our submission of our client's resignation, our office was successful in securing her resignation for the good of the service.
  • RETROACTIVE PROMOTION Naval physician was denied Special Professional Pays and Bonus, as well as promotion
    • Military Defense
    Naval physician was denied Special Professional Pays and Bonus, as well as promotion, due to noncompliance with PRT (body fat) standards. We filed a legal action with the U.S. Court of Claims. While the claim was pending, the officer came within standards and was given his Special Pays. We thereafter secured RETROACTIVE PROMOTION in a negotiated resolution of the claim.
  • Retains Naval Career Navy O-3 failure to comply with Liberty-Buddy regulation
    • Military Defense
    Navy 0-3, a Naval Academy graduate, was taken to Mast (NJP) on a Naval ship for charges related to failure to comply with Liberty-Buddy regulation, as well as fraternization, false official statement and conduct unbecoming an officer for abandoning his liberty buddy. Our office was retained to represent him at his Show Cause Board of Inquiry. At the BOI, we were able to secure a NO MISCONDUCT finding on the charges of false office statement and fraternization. Although the Board did find misconduct on the 2 remaining accusations, as well as substandard performance of duty, the Board found by a vote of 3-0 that our client would be RETAINED in the Naval service.
  • Avoids OTH Administrative Separation Navy SEAL - Separation
    • Military Defense
    Navy SEAL had accepted Non-Judicial Punishment for violations of Art 92 – 3 specifications of violating a lawful general regulation by wrongfully possessing and storing classified material, Art 107 – 3 specifications of false office statements; Art 121 – 6 specifications of wrongful appropriation of government property, and Art 134 – violate Title 18, U.S. code by removing classified materials to an unauthorized location. We were retained after our client received notification for administrative separation proceedings. At the administrative separation board, the Government counsel requested separation for misconduct with an OTH. The board ruled in our favor and found that the evidence did not warrant administrative separation of our client.
  • Avoids Military Discharge Army Captain failure to keep pace
    • Military Defense
    An Army Captain was taken to a Show Cause Board for failure to keep pace with his contemporaries. He was represented by military counsel at that Board and the Board resulted in a recommendation that he be discharged. Client retained us after discharge orders were executed. We were able to stop the discharge, SET ASIDE THE RESULTS OF THE BOARD, and get a new a Board convened. At the new Board, we disqualified the first panel for bias. The second panel returned a recommendation of RETENTION.
  • Retains Service Status O-6 Active Duty Physician - Administrative Separation
    • Military Defense
    O-6 Active Duty Physician recommended for Administrative Separation through "Board of Inquiry/Show Cause" procedures for poly-substance abuse (alcohol and prescription drugs); alcohol rehabilitation failure; Misconduct - Violation of UCMJ Art. 86: Unauthorized Absence for 3 days and Unauthorized Absence for 7 days; Art. 133: Conduct Unbecoming an Officer; and, Art. 134: Drunkenness; as well as Substandard Performance of Duty and Failure to comport with expected standards for an officer of that grade and experience. Case determined by panel composed of three Flag/General Officers with final recommendation for RETENTION in the Military.
  • Favorably Discharged Navy E-6 administratively separated for Personality Disorder
    • Military Defense
    Exceptionally successful Navy E-6 administratively separated for Personality Disorder. Upon presentation of case at Personal Appearance before Discharge Review Board, we were able to demonstrate that improper medical diagnosis was made negating factual basis, as well as failure by command to comply with procedural requirements for that reason for administrative separation. Result was unanimous vote by Board, based upon both propriety and equity, with approved decision to change narrative reason for separation to non-adverse basis of "Secretarial Authority."
  • Cleared of Charges Navy E-6 NJP Charges
    • Military Defense
    Navy E-6 with 12+ years of service retained our office after he was found guilty at NJP of 2 specifications of sexual harassment, assault and bribery. In addition to the subject NJP, he had 3 other NJP’s on his record. At his administrative separation board, we secured a finding of NO MISCONDUCT as to all offenses.
  • NCO RETAINED Army E-6 - ADMINISTRATIVE SEPARATION BOARD FINDS NO REHABILITATION FAILURE
    • Military Defense
    Army E-6 faced administrative separation for rehabilitation failure. Client had become addicted to pain medication prescribed to him by the military. After doing a self-referral, asking for help with the addiction, our client was placed into a rehabilitation program (inpatient), however several days after starting, he had an incident that caused him to leave the program, and then subsequently abused the same medication (after he had been ordered to surrender all meds to his command); The command put him through another inpatient rehab program which he completed, however several days later he missed formation due to problems with his prescribed sleep medication. The command declared him a rehabilitation failure at that point and processed him for separation. At the board, the government took a firm position that our client had in fact failed rehab on 3 occasions and should be discharged. After our argument that this was a rehab success, not a triple rehab failure, the board found that there had been no failure of rehabilitation and our client has been retained in the Army to continue his otherwise outstanding career.
  • SET ASIDE - OFFICER RETAINED Air Force Lt. Colonel - RESULTS OF BOARD OF INQUIRY
    • Military Defense
    Air Force Academy Graduate in the rank of Lt Col (0-5), with over 18 years of active duty service, was taken to an Article 15 (NJP) for a DUI. Our client had an extensive adverse history of alcohol related incidents, to include 3 previous Article 15’s for various alcohol related offenses, drunk on duty, failure to go to appointed place of duty and a previous DUI. Our office was retained for representation at his Show Cause Board of Inquiry. Prior to being retained, the Air Force had sent our client to inpatient treatment for his alcoholism and he had completed it successfully. At the time of the BOI, our client had been abstinent for over 8 months. At the BOI, the board determined that our client should not be retained in the U.S. Air Force due to misconduct related to multiple Article 15’s on his record, and that he should be separated with a General characterization of service. Despite the discharge recommendation, we continued with our efforts to salvage our client’s career and retirement. We submitted additional documentation and argument to the Secretary of the Air Force, to include the fact that our client had now been abstinent for over 17 months, as well as additional recommendations for retention. Approximately a year after the board recommended separation, the Secretary of the Air Force granted our request that our client be retained - the findings of the Board of Inquiry were SET ASIDE, and our client is now able to continue his service and eventually retire from the Air Force.
  • CAREER RETAINED Navy O-3E NJP Dereliction of Duty
    • Military Defense
    Navy 0-3E with 23+ years of service was taken to NJP and given 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 BOI, our client was RETAINED and will be able to continue his career until he retires when he decides to do so.
  • Retained Navy Corpsman with NJP for Steroid Use and Forgery
    • Military Defense
    Navy E-6 Corpsman was charged with multiple drug related offenses pertaining to wrongful possession of narcotics he had been issued pursuant to his Corpsman duties, as well as the wrongful use of steroids, larceny of narcotics and ammunition, forgery, fraud and adultery. After an Art. 32 investigation, we were able to secure a withdrawal of all charges, conditioned upon our client accepting NJP for wrongful use of steroids and forgery. At NJP, our client received minimal punishment (he was not reduced in rank), however he had to appear before an administrative separation board due to the Navy’s “Zero Tolerance” program on drug offenses, in addition to an allegation of rehab failure for non-compliance with family advocacy counseling requirements for domestic abuse, and the forgery allegation. At the administrative separation board, we secured a finding of no rehab failure, as well as the recommendation that our client be retained in the Navy.
  • Retained Second Positive Urinalysis
    • Military Defense
    Coast Guard E -5 retained our firm after he came up positive on a urinalysis for marijuana. Our client had a prior positive for marijuana several years earlier in his career. We advised our client to refuse Mast (NJP) and demand trial by court-martial. Upon doing so, the command elected to take our client to an administrative separation board instead of court-martial. At the beginning of the separation board hearing, Mr. McCormack successfully challenged two board members, requiring the board to be rescheduled. At the second hearing, we presented evidence of unknowing ingestion of marijuana – despite extensive argument by the Government counsel that the respondent had previously tested positive for marijuana, and had disclosed pre-service use of marijuana, the board voted in our client’s favor and he was RETAINED in the Coast Guard.
  • No Basis for Administrative Separation Command Master Chief
    • Military Defense
    Navy E-9 with 23 years of outstanding service was the Command Master Chief onboard a Naval ship while an investigation was conducted related to assorted misconduct by enlisted personnel. Although there was no finding of “misconduct” entered against our client, she was Relieved and Detached for Cause. Naval Personnel Command directed that our client be processed for administrative separation by reason of unsatisfactory performance. At the administrative separation board, we first successfully challenged one of the board members – once a new member was appointed, upon presentation of the documentation in support of our client’s case, we argued that the administrative separation processing was improper, in that our client had not been “counseled” prior to her DFC as required by the applicable regulations. After we raised that issue, the Government counsel advised that PERS had been contacted during the break in the proceedings, and directed that the administrative separation proceedings continue. Upon reopening of the proceedings, we presented additional argument on the issue, resulting in another delay in the proceedings while the Government again evaluated the argument we presented to the board. When the board was again brought into session, the Government counsel advised the board to the effect that our position was in fact correct, and that there was not a basis for administrative separation. Based upon that concession of the Government, the board found that there was not a basis to process our client for administrative separation.
  • HONORABLE DISCHARGE NAVY CHIEF ADMITS DRUG USE
    • Military Defense
    Navy Master at Arms Chief Petty Officer (E-7) with over 19 years of service came up positive on a urinalysis for marijuana. During the course of the investigation our client made a statement to NCIS admitting to the wrongful use of marijuana. At a Special Court-Martial, although we prevailed on a Motion to Suppress that statement to NCIS, the case was still proceeding to trial. With the chance of securing an acquittal being very remote due to other evidence we were facing, we were finally able to secure the command’s agreement to take the case to a Summary Court-Martial where our client plead Guilty to the wrongful use of marijuana, at which time he was sentenced to be reduced to pay grade E-6, forfeitures of pay and 45 days of restriction. Upon submission of a clemency request, we were able to get the command to suspend the 45 days of restriction. Seven months prior to our client reaching the 20 year mark for retirement, the command initiated administrative separation proceedings – at the separation board, our client again admitted the wrongful use of marijuana – the board recommended that his separation be suspended for 6 months, and that upon discharge, that our client receive an HONORABLE DISCHARGE certificate.
  • NAVY OIC RETAINED DETACHED FOR CAUSE
    • Military Defense
    Navy 0-4 with 15 years of service was assigned as an OIC of an overseas detachment was detached for cause. After the DFC was approved, Navy Bureau of Personnel directed that the officer be required to appear before an administrative Show Cause Board of Inquiry proceedings in an effort to secure an administrative separation of our client for substandard performance of duty. After presentation of our evidence and argument before the Board, our client was RETAINED and will be able to continue his Naval career.
  • SEPARATION BOARD FINDS NO MISCONDUCT NAVY CHIEF – TAKEN TO MAST AND DETACHED FOR CAUSE
    • Military Defense
    Navy E-7 (Air Traffic Controller) with over 18 years of service faced an Administrative Separation Board for misconduct (leaving watch without being properly relieved) and substandard performance of duties (failure to secure necessary qualifications). Our client was found guilty at Mast (NJP) of dereliction of duty and was detached for cause.After he was transferred, Naval Personnel Command directed that he be processed for administrative separation, putting him in a situation of facing the loss of his career and retirement benefits, with an unfavorable discharge characterization. At the board, we acknowledged that our client did in fact leave his watch without proper relief. We presented significant evidence of good military character and aggressively challenged the testimony of the Division officer as to issues that existed in the command. Upon conclusion of the case, the board returned the finding that our client DID NOT COMMIT MISCONDUCT and was NOT SUBSTANDARD IN THE PERFORMANCE OF HIS DUTIES. Our client will now be able to continue with his career, and retire from the Navy.
  • Relief warranted. FORMER USN E-2 CHANGE CHARACTERIZATION OF SERVICE
    • Military Defense
    Former USN E-2 was awarded three Nonjudicial Punishments, during the initial enlistment, for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). The member was subsequently separated from the military for commission of a serious offense. The characterization of service was Other Than Honorable (OTH). Upon application for discharge review, the member, represented by McCormack & McCormack, personally appeared before the Navy Discharge Review Board. By a vote of 4 to 1, the Board changed the member's characterization of service to General (Under Honorable Conditions). Based upon the facts and circumstances unique to this case, and after considering the member's post-service conduct in conjunction with the member's testimony, and the testimony of the member's witness, the Board determined relief was warranted.
  • RETAINED Army E-7 Facing Multiple Offenses for Maltreatment
    • Military Defense
    Army E-7 with 19 years of service was charged with multiple offenses related to maltreatment of AIT trainees. Charges were heading into an Art. 32 and a General Court-Martial. Prior to the Art. 32, the charges were WITHDRAWN. Although our client was pending medical separation proceedings, several months later the command initiated administrative separation action, where our client was then facing a discharge for misconduct and an OTH discharge. The government argued extensively that our client should be discharged with an OTH, which would result in denial of retirement benefits. Although the board found that our client did commit misconduct as to some of the allegations, the board recommended by a vote of 3-0 that our client be RETAINED. Our client will now be able to complete his medical processing, where he will be retired with a disability rating.
  • Honorable Conditions Granted Army Special Forces E-4 Facing OTH For Deserter Status
    • Military Defense
    Army Special Forces E -4 retained us while he was in a deserter status. He left his command without authority and went to another country. Upon retention, we had to coordinate our client's return to military control through the U.S. Embassy since he would have been arrested on a federal deserter warrant when he went through customs. Although we fully expected our client would be immediately taken into custody and placed into pretrial confinement upon return to the country, we were able to avoid that from happening. Upon return to his command, the SJA's office advised us that he would be taken to a court-martial, facing a federal conviction, confinement and bad conduct discharge. We were able to negotiate alternate disposition that involved Art. 15 punishment, with a waiver of his right to appear at an administrative separation board, which would result in an OTH characterization. After our client went to the Art. 15 and signed his waiver of the administrative separation board, we submitted a letter to the command requesting that our client be given a General under Honorable Conditions discharge, rather than the OTH. Our request was granted and our client was separated with a General discharge, without a federal conviction or any confinement time.
  • Retained in the naval service Navy O-4
    • Military Defense
    Navy O-4: Respondent received notification of administrative show cause proceedings, for retention in the naval service. Basis for separation – Misconduct (commission of a military or civilian offense), for allegations of dereliction of duty, sexual harassment, fraternization, and conduct unbecoming an officer and gentleman; and Substandard Performance of Duty (inability to maintain adequate levels of performance), for allegations of a failure to demonstrate acceptable qualities of leadership required of an officer in the member's grade; a failure to properly discharge duties expected of officers of the member's grade and experience; and a failure to conform to prescribed standards of military deportment. The least favorable characterization of service recommended was Other Than Honorable (OTH). Upon review and consideration by the Board of Inquiry, the members recommended that the Respondent be retained in the naval service.
  • Relief was granted Army E-5
    • Military Defense
    Army E-5 : Processed for administrative separation by reason of misconduct (drug abuse); and subsequently separated, after 5 years of military service, with a General (under honorable conditions) discharge. Seeking a change in the narrative reason for separation, and characterization of service, McCormack & McCormack represented the member, through application and petition for record review, by the Army Discharge Review Board. Result: the Board determined the discrediting entries in the service record had been mitigated, and the characterization of service too harsh, and inequitable – relief in the form of an upgrade of character of service to Honorable, was granted.
  • Allow retirement Army O-4
    • Military Defense
    Army O-4: Subsequent to submitting a voluntary retirement request, officer received notification of review by the Army Grade Determination Review Board (AGDRB), to determine the highest grade in which the officer served satisfactorily for retirement purposes. Subject review was the result of a previous General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand, and an AR 15-6 Investigation (allegations of abusive, disrespectful, and unprofessional, leadership; and a failure to foster a climate of dignity and respect amongst peers and subordinates). McCormack & McCormack assisted the military member with the preparation and submission of a response, and matters for consideration, to the AGDRB. Result: the AGDRB recommended O-4 as the highest grade in which the officer served satisfactorily; thereafter, the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army made the final determination to allow retirement at paygrade O-4.
  • Granted full relief. Army Reserve O-5
    • Military Defense
    Army Reserve O-5 : Following honorable discharge from the U.S. Army Reserve, and receipt of the final Chronological Statement of Retirement Points, a review determined the termination of a past period of active duty (as reflected on the DD Form 214) incorrectly reflected the officer was discharged (Hardship), vice, released from active duty; thereby, jeopardizing the officer’s total creditable points for subsequent retirement pay at age 60. Seeking a change in the narrative reason for separation, separation code, and separation authority, McCormack & McCormack represented the member, through application and petition for record change/correction, by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records. Result: the Board determined the request had merit, and granted full relief.
  • Board majority granted the requested relief Air Force E-7
    • Military Defense
    Separated from the service with an Other Than Honorable (OTH) Discharge, through an administrative separation board, for misconduct (sexual perversion – possession of child pornography). Through representation by McCormack & McCormack, the service member applied to, and personally appeared before, the Air Force Discharge Review Board, seeking upgrade of his discharge and to change the reason and authority for the discharge, on the basis of propriety and equity. The Board concluded that the overall quality of the member's service was more accurately reflected as Honorable, and that the reason for discharge warranted change to Secretarial Authority. Accordingly, the Board majority granted the requested relief.
  • Medically separated with disability pay Administrative Separation
    • Military Defense

    Administrative Separation: National Guard Warrant Officer with 16+ years of service faced a Board of Inquiry for withdrawal of federal recognition and adverse separation from the National Guard for an alcohol related incident involving him punching an enlisted soldier during a verbal altercation concerning a sexual related comment to a female soldier, and then several minutes later returning to the scene and punching another enlisted soldier. During the Board, the Government presented evidence of a prior charge of domestic battery on his ex-wife, as well as testimony that our client received an Art 15 for drunk and disorderly 10 years earlier when he was an E-4. At the Board, we were immediately confronted with the fact that our senior member (an 0-6) had sat on 9 prior boards in the past 24 months and contended the reason he had been selected so frequently to sit on separation boards was because he was "so impartial".

    Our challenge of the senior member was denied as expected, yet it didn't take long to see that the "impartial" senior member may not have been so impartial as he claimed. We presented evidence that our client was diagnosed with PTSD as a result of his first combat deployment to Iraq in 2004, and was thereafter mishandled by the VA in 2015 when he sought help for the PTSD and alcohol problems as his life was literally unraveling several months before the subject incident. After several hours of what clearly was a very contentious period of deliberations between the four members, the "verdict" was finally returned in favor of our client, that we had provided substantial evidence that his federal recognition should not be withdrawn, thus allowing our client to be medically separated with disability pay as a result of PTSD and retaining all benefits.

  • CHARGES WITHDRAWN Army Commander Accused of Fraternization
    • Military Defense
    Army company commander was charged with several offenses surrounding allegations that he maltreated and fraternized with female members of his command in addition to using indecent language to his enlisted subordinates. After our representation at the Art. 32 wherein we were able to aggressively confront his accusers, all charges were WITHDRAWN.
  • RETAINED CAREER Naval Officer Charged With Fraternization
    • Military Defense
    Navy officer charged with fraternization with 3 enlisted females, as well as 3 specifications of assault and battery upon one of the enlisted females, false official statement and adultery. The Government had a video tape of sexual activity by our client with one of the enlisted females that occurred in our client's stateroom on a Navy ship. We were able to negotiate a pretrial agreement that provided for withdrawal of all charges except 2 specifications of fraternization, with a cap of 30 days of confinement. At trial, we secured a sentence of 60 days restriction, forfeiture of pay and a reprimand. Our client DID NOT SERVE ANY CONFINEMENT AND WAS NOT PUNITIVELY DISCHARGED from the Navy.
  • NOT GUILTY Navy E-7 Accused of Shipboard Sexual Harassment
    • Military Defense
    A Navy E-7 was taken to NJP on a ship for several allegations of sexual harassment. At the Administrative Separation Board, we secured a finding of NO MISCONDUCT as to the sexual harassment allegations.
  • CAREER RETAINED Naval Officer Accused of Sexual Harassment
    • Military Defense
    Senior Naval officer was charged with allegations related to sexual harassment arising from multiple alcohol-related incidents. We advised officer to refuse Non-Judicial Punishment, which likely would have lead to General Courts-Martial. The command declined to take the case to Courts-Martial, however Naval Personnel Command directed that the officer appear before a Show Cause Board of Inquiry. Although the Board did find misconduct, the Board recommended the officer be RETAINED in the Navy, allowing the officer to retire as scheduled.
  • NO MISCONDUCT Naval Officer Accused of Sexual Harassment
    • Military Defense
    Navy E-7 with 14 years of outstanding service was subjected to non-judicial punishment on his se-going command for 5 specifications of sexual harassment and 1 specification of creating a hostile work environment. A total of 9 females made accusations of sexual harassment, and several additional witnesses made statements that were used against our client. After NJP, his case was referred to an administrative separation board, where he faced separation for misconduct, commission of a serious offense, and an "Other-than-Honorable" discharge. At the administrative separation board, we secured a finding of NO MISCONDUCT and our client will be retained on active duty.
  • Did Not Warrant Separation SEXUAL HARASSMENT
    • Military Defense
    Army O-4: Elimination proceedings were initiation against Army O-4, and directed to show cause for retention, due to personal misconduct, moral or professional dereliction; and derogatory information, as evidenced by a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR), as a result of allegations of sexual harassment; participating in a hostile work environment; and other related acts. The officer elected the right to be heard before an Officer Administrative Separation Board. Represented by McCormack & McCormack, the Board of Officers, upon hearing and considering all the evidence presented, found (1), the allegations of personal misconduct, moral or professional dereliction, and conduct unbecoming an officer, were not supported by a preponderance of evidence, and did not warrant separation; and (2), that although the allegation of adverse information (GOMOR) was filed in the officer’s Official Military Personnel File (OMPF), it did not warrant separation.
  • RETAINED RETIREMENT Naval Petty Officer Accused of Child Pornography
    • Military Defense
    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, with further agreement to limit the reduction to not exceed two pay grades, limiting confinement to not exceed ninety days and suspending a punitive discharge. At trial, we secured a sentence of a one grade pay reduction and 89 days of confinement. After the trial, the command initiated administrative separation action for misconduct in an effort to deny the service member his retirement. We secured a RETENTIONrecommendation from the Board, allowing the service member to retire.
  • ACQUITTED Air Force E-6 Accused of Using Government Computer For Porn
    • Military Defense
    Air Force E-6 was charged with using his government computer for accessing pornography on the internet. The AF defense attorney recommended that our client accept NJP. Upon our advice, our client refused NJP and at a Special Courts-Martial, we secured an ACQUITTAL of all charges before a jury.
  • CAREER RETAINED Navy E-4 Charged with Online Solicitation of a Minor
    • Military Defense
    Navy E-4 was the subject of an internet sting operation by authorities. After several on-line instant message chats with a person he thought was a 14 year old girl, he arranged to meet the girl for the purpose of engaging in sexual relations. Upon arrival at the meeting place, he was apprehended by NCIS for on-line solicitation of a minor to engage in carnal knowledge. After his apprehension, he left his command without authority and missed ship's movement. Although we secured a recommendation that the case be referred to a Special Court-Martial from the investigating officer at the Art. 32 investigation, the charges were referred to a General Court-Martial where our client faced a maximum punishment of life in prison and a Dishonorable Discharge. Through extensive pre-trial negotiations we were able to secure a pre-trial agreement that called for the dismissal of a charge of attempt to communicate indecent language to a minor, as well as missing movement, with a sentencing limitation that would suspend all confinement in excess of one year. After presentation of evidence and argument at the sentencing phase of our trial, our client was sentenced to serve only 85 days of confinement, to be reduced to E-2 and to pay a $5,000.00 fine. He was not sentenced to be punitively discharged from the Navy. The military judge then recommended on the record that the command consider returning our client to the fleet. Despite the fact that our client agreed in the Pretrial Agreement to be administratively separated from the Navy with on OTH if he was not punitively discharged by the judge, our client has in fact been retained and was returned to the fleet to continue his career in the Navy
  • NO FEDERAL CONVICTION OR REGISTRATION REQUIRED Navy E-4 Charged With Child Pornography
    • Military Defense
    Navy E-4 retained our services after waiving his right to an Art 32 for child porn related offenses. The military attorney had negotiated a pretrial agreement for our client to enter a plea of guilty to possessing child pornography, in exchange for a sentencing cap of 24 months confinement. If our client had followed his military attorney's advice, upon his conviction of the child porn related offenses, he would have been obligated to register as a sex offender and would have faced an almost certain punitive discharge and extended period of confinement. Upon being retained and investigating the facts, we determined that there was a significant search and seizure issue in the case that was apparently not addressed by the military attorney, as well as a question as to the admissibility of our client's two (2) signed confessions. We were able to secure a WITHDRAWAL of the Art 32 waiver and took the case to an Art 32 hearing, where we were able to fully address the assorted issues in the case. As a result of our extensive cross examination of the NCIS agent which clearly established non-compliance with proper law enforcement procedures, the investigating officer recommended that the Convening Authority report the conduct of the NCIS agent to the Special Agent in Charge for appropriate action. After the Art 32, the government counsel solicited a pretrial agreement from us for the limits of a Special Court-Martial (12 month, BCD cap that would still require sex offender registration); although that was a significant reduction from the original 2 year PTA that had been negotiated, we refused that offer. After continued negotiations, we were able to secure an administrative discharge for our client with an OTH - totally avoiding the federal conviction, punitive discharge, extensive confinement and sex offender registration that our client was about ready to walk into before we were retained.
  • RETIREMENT RETAINED Navy E-8 Charged With Child Pornography
    • Military Defense
    Navy E-8 with over 20 years of service was charged with on-line solicitation of a minor, and possession of child pornography. We were able to negotiate a resolution that subjected our client to a 2 grade pay reduction and a max of thirty (30) days in the brig. Our client will be able to retire from the Navy in paygrade of E-6.
  • REDUCED PUNISHMENT Marine E-3 Charged With Child Pornography
    • Military Defense
    Marine E-3 downloaded child pornography to his laptop before deploying to Afghanistan. Once in Afghanistan, our client saved the files in question, as well as adult pornography to an external hard drive. Other Marines asked to borrow his external hard drive to review his adult pornography and despite cautioning the Marines not to go into his “personal” folder, one Marine did, and discovered the child pornography which was reported to the command. Our client faced a General Court-Martial on charges of violation of the general order for possession of adult pornography in Afghanistan, as well as possession of child pornography. At trial, we litigated a suppression issue, which the judge ruled against us. Clearly our client was looking at being convicted of both offenses, however if he entered the standard guilty plea, he would waive his right to appeal on that issue, so we were able to negotiate a provision into the plea agreement that reserved his right to appeal the suppression issue. On his guilty pleas, he was facing a maximum of 12 years of confinement and a Dishonorable Discharge – the pretrial agreement provided for a 12 month confinement cap. At trial, after presentation of our sentencing case, the judge sentenced our client to only 6 months – and he was NOT given a punitive discharge from the Marines.
  • Conviction set aside Child Pornography
    • Military Defense

    Prior to retaining our law firm, Navy E-4 was tried by a General Court-Martial composed of officer and enlisted members. Contrary to his plea, Appellant was convicted of two specifications of knowingly receiving images of child pornography, in violation of Article 134, Uniform Code of Military Justice. The military judge found two specifications multiplicious and set aside the finding of guilty to one of those specifications. The Appellant was sentenced to 90 days confinement, reduction to pay grade E-1, and a bad conduct discharge, and as a result, was obligated to register as a sex offender. The Convening Authority approved the sentence as adjudged.

    Our firm was retained for representation on appeal - after consideration of our Appellate Brief, the Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals found merit in the Appellant's assigned error that the Military Judge committed reversible error when he denied the defense's motion to compel the Convening Authority to provide sufficient funds for the defense expert to remain at the court-martial and testify. The Court set aside the findings and sentence. Our client’s conviction has been set aside in its’ entirety and his obligation to register as a sex offender will be vacated.

  • RETAINED SO THAT HE COULD RETIRE Wrongful Possession of Child Pornography
    • Military Defense
    Air Force 0-4 with approximately 19 years of service was convicted by a military jury of wrongful possession of child pornography. At the sentencing hearing, the prosecution asked the jury for a lengthy period of confinement, as well as a punitive dismissal, which would have resulted in the loss of his retirement and VA benefits. We secured a sentence of only 30 days of confinement and some forfeiture of pay – he was not punitively dismissed by the jury. Our client was then notified that he would face an administrative separation action based upon the conviction, which again would have resulted in the loss of his retirement and VA benefits. At the Board of Inquiry, we presented supporting statement from some of the court-martial jury members, indicating that the jury had determined that our client should be retained in the Air Force so that he could retire. Although the Government strongly argued that our client be separated with a discharge characterized as under Other than Honorable Conditions, the Board agreed with our argument that he SHOULD NOT BE DISCHARGED, and should be RETAINED SO THAT HE COULD RETIRE upon attainment of 20 years of service. Our client has since retired from the Air Force.
  • Successful Appeal, Back Pay Restored Child Pornography- Internet SexCrimes- Possession of Child Pornography
    • Military Defense

    USN E5 was convicted at a General Court Martial of offenses related to possession of child pornography and was sentenced to a Bad Conduct Discharge, confinement for 90 days and reduction to the paygrade of E-1. Our law firm was retained to represent the client on his appeal of his court martial conviction. After review of his record of trial and submission of our appeal, the Navy and Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals agreed with one issue we raised on appeal and set aside the court martial conviction. Our client was then ordered back to active duty and retried at a General Court Martial on the same charges, being represented once again only by military counsel. He was again found guilty and sentenced to restriction to the military installation for 60 days and reduction to E-3. Shortly thereafter he was administratively separated with an Other than Honorable characterization.

    After the client was discharged, our client again contacted us to assist in his efforts to recover back pay owed to him by virtue of our successful appeal of his first conviction. We spent several months working with the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) to recoup his military pay that was owed to him from the time he was originally court martialed until he was recalled to active duty, DFAS. We secured an initial payment of $13,561.86. Upon review of the financial documentation provided by DFAS, significant errors were discovered by our office. A follow up inquiry was sent to DFAS and a second payment was issued to our client in the amount of $16,815.11 for a total recoupment of $30,376.97 in back pay for our client, after taxes.

  • CHARGES DISMISSED Navy Enlisted Man Accused of Indecency Charges
    • Military Defense
    A junior Naval enlisted man was charged with forcible sodomy and forcible object penetration in state court. Prior to the preliminary hearing, we secured the sworn admission from the alleged victim that all sexual acts were consented to and thereafter secured a DISMISSAL of the criminal charges.
  • CHARGES ACQUITTED Navy Corpsman Accused of Sexual Assault
    • Military Defense
    Navy corpsman was charged with sexually assaulting two female patients under his care. Both victims positively identified our client as having committed the sexual assaults. Our client made a statement to the investigators to the effect that he did “massage” one of the patients and a search of his barracks resulted in recovery of potentially damaging evidence. Pre-trial negotiations were attempted without success, so the case proceeded to an enlisted jury, which ACQUITTED our client of all charges.
  • NOT GUILTY Naval Medical Officer Accused of Sexual Assault
    • Military Defense
    Male Naval Officer was charged with sexually assaulting three junior enlisted men in a health care setting. The officer acknowledged having contact with the genitalia of two of the men, however defended his actions as being medically necessary. The officer was found NOT GUILTY of all charges by a General Courts-Martial jury.
  • CHARGES WITHDRAWN Air Force NCO Accused of Sexual Assault
    • Military Defense
    Air Force NCO was charged with indecent sexual assault of a junior co-worker in a public bathroom. If convicted, he would have certainly faced a lengthy period of confinement, a punitive discharge and a federal conviction and would have been required to register as a sexual offender. Two days prior to the start of his General Court-Martial trial, after a weekend of non-stop negotiation, we were able to secure the WITHDRAWALof charges based upon our client accepting an Art. 15 for an indecent act (consensual sexual conduct in a public bathroom). He was reduced one pay grade, and lost some pay, but will be allowed to retire from the Air Force.
  • ACQUITTED Air Force E-5 Accused of Indecent Assault
    • Military Defense
    Air Force E-5 was charged with indecent assault of another service member. Although our client was not charged with rape, the evidence presented at the court-martial was that there was non-consensual penile penetration, with extensive internal vaginal trauma. Male DNA was also detected in the external vaginal area. Our client made a statement to the investigators admitting that he was told by the alleged victim that although he could spend the night with her, she was not interested in any sexual activity with him. He further admitted in engaging in assorted sexual fondling of the complainant. Without putting our client on the witness stand, we secured an ACQUITTAL of the charge.
  • Acquitted Sex Assault
    • Military Defense
    Army E-4 was accused of sexual assault of a female soldier who he had developed a close relationship with. On the night in question, the female alleged that she went to sleep in her room while the accused was watching TV. She claimed that she woke up to our client engaging in sexual intercourse with her without her consent. At trial by General Court-Martial, we faced a string of text messages between our client and his accuser, which ranged from nothing happened, to admission of digital penetration to "wake her up", and finally to penile penetration with an apology. The trial was extremely contentious, with a government expert licensed clinical social worker testifying as to counterintuitive behavior of sex assault victims. Greg McCormack's aggressive cross examination of the complainant and government expert resulted in a short deliberation by the jury of about an hour, returning a verdict of NOT GUILTY without the defense presenting any evidence. After the verdict, 2 members of the jury sought out Greg McCormack to express their appreciation for a job well done in defending our client.
  • CRIMINAL PROSECUTION AVOIDED Army E-2 Accused of Rape
    • Military Defense
    Army E-2 was charged with forcible sodomy and three counts of rape related to an incident where several soldiers were drinking in a motel room. The government had witnesses ready to testify that the alleged victim was highly intoxicated and that our client repeatedly kept engaging in sexual activity despite being pulled off of her and told to leave her alone. Prior to the Art. 32 Investigation, we submitted a request for discharge in lieu of Courts-Martial which the prosecution staff effectively laughed at due to the seriousness of the charges. Despite upper level chain of command and SJA recommendations that the discharge request be denied, we were able to secure approval of the request and our client totally AVOIDED CRIMINAL PROSECUTION on charges that easily could have put him in prison for life.
  • REDUCED CONFINEMENT Marine Charged with Multiple Offenses
    • Military Defense
    Enlisted Marine was charged with 26 offenses against his wife, to include rape, maiming, 5 specifications of forcible sodomy and 11 specifications of assault. After the Art. 32, we were able to negotiate a plea agreement which resulted in a Guilty plea to only 4 specifications (maiming, two assaults and communicating a threat) which significantly limited his confinement exposure from life without parole to 11 years. The prosecution asked for a seven year sentence and although the judge imposed a 5 year sentence, our client's confinement was limited to 15 months under the terms of the plea agreement we negotiated. The remaining 22 specifications were DISMISSED.
  • HONORABLY DISCHARGED Navy Man Charged With Shipmate Rape
    • Military Defense
    Navy Petty Officer was charged with rape of a shipmate. After the Art. 32, in order to avoid the risks associated with proceeding on the rape charge, we were able to secure an administrative discharge for our client in lieu of court-martial, based upon his agreement that he engaged in sexual contact in a room with an unlocked door when another person was present in the house. Although the discharge was under other than honorable conditions, we told our client we felt we could possibly get his discharge upgraded after he was out of the Navy. Once he was discharged, we filed a petition for upgrade of the discharge on the grounds that the act he admitted to was not a criminal offense worthy of an adverse discharge - the Board for Correction agreed and upgraded his discharge to an Honorable.
  • CHARGES WITHDRAWN Master Chief Accused of Rape
    • Military Defense
    Command Master Chief with twenty years of service was charged with raping a young female sailor who worked in his office. After the Article 32 Investigation, all charges were WITHDRAWN.
  • CHARGES WITHDRAWN Coast Guard E-4 Charged with Civilian Rape
    • Military Defense
    Coast Guard E-4 was charged by civilian authorities with rape and abduction of a civilian co-worker. Our client acknowledged that he did have sexual relations with the woman, at the work place, but contended the acts were consensual. At the trial, we prevailed on a motion to preclude the prosecutors from putting on evidence related to vaginal injuries which resulted in the WITHDRAWAL of the charges by the civilian authorities. The Coast Guard then charged our client with rape and forcible sodomy. Prior to the Art. 32 Investigation, we were able to secure a WITHDRAWAL of those charges also.
  • ACQUITTED Navy E-4 Charged With Rape of Female Shipmate
    • Military Defense
    Navy E-4 was charged with rape and forcibly sodomy of a female shipmate. The alleged victim contended she was intoxicated and asleep at the time of the repeated assaults. Our client was subjected to 3 NCIS interrogations where he gave conflicting statements after a polygraph examination. We secured a complete ACQUITTAL of all charges, without putting on any evidence in our case, before an enlisted jury.
  • MISTRIAL - DISMISSAL OF CHARGES Navy E-5 Appeal of Rape Charge
    • Military Defense
    A Navy E-5 retained our firm to represent him on the appeal of his General Courts-Martial conviction for two counts of rape for which he was sentenced to serve 12 years in confinement. After his trial, one of his court members allegedly made a comment that indicated the member may have failed to disclose disqualifying information in the jury selection proceedings. We filed a Motion for Mistrial and secured a post–trial hearing. After intense cross–examination of one of the court members, we successfully argued the case to obtain entry of a MISTRIAL order, resulting in the IMMEDIATE RELEASE OF OUR CLIENT FROM CONFINEMENT (our client had served a year at Ft. Leavenworth) and DISMISSAL OF THE CHARGES. Upon retrial (in which we were not involved), the sailor received a very short period of additional confinement.
  • ACQUITTAL Accused of Forcible Rape
    • Military Defense
    Junior Navy enlisted man was prosecuted by state authorities for forcible rape of a woman in a motel room. The prosecution had a video tape of our client, and of his friend, which showed the girl in the motel room, passed out from alcohol, lying in a pool of vomit. Our client was ACQUITTED of the charge.
  • CHARGES WITHDRAWN Rape of a Shipmate
    • Military Defense
    A Navy petty officer was charged with rape of a shipmate. As a result of the ART. 32 Investigation, the charges were WITHDRAWN.
  • CHARGES WITHDRAWN Midshipman Accused of Multiple Charges
    • Military Defense
    Naval Academy Midshipman in his senior year was accused of rape, sodomy and assorted offenses against another Midshipman. After the Art. 32 Investigation, apparently as a result of discovery issues which we raised, all charges were WITHDRAWN before trial.
  • SENTENCE REDUCED Navy Man Charged With Rape
    • Military Defense
    Navy petty officer retained us a few days before he was scheduled to appear at a General Court-Martial on a charge of rape. The plea agreement, negotiated by his military lawyer and signed by our client before we were retained, required him to plead guilty to rape, and provided him with a sentencing protection that would subject him to serving up to seven (7) years of confinement. Although our client admitted to continued sexual penetration of the complainant after she told him to stop, we felt he had a defense to the rape charge based upon his confession which stated that the complainant consented to the initial penetration. Upon retention, we withdrew from the pretrial agreement and took the case to an Art. 32 hearing. After the Art. 32, we were able to renegotiate the plea agreement, which provided that our client would enter a plea of guilty to a lessor offense of indecent assault, with the Government being able to proceed on the rape charge. During the contested trial on the rape charge, after our extensive cross-examination of the complainant, the prosecutor advised the court that he felt ethically bound to disclose that the complainant may have testified falsely on cross-examination. Despite that fact, as well as the fact that we developed numerous inconsistencies in her testimony on cross-examination, our client was still convicted of the rape charge. However, in the plea agreement we negotiated, we were able to reduce our client’s exposure of confinement from the seven (7) years the military lawyer had negotiated, to only four (4) years. Unquestionably, by taking the rape case to trial, we were successful in bringing many facts to the attention of the court that would not have been revealed had he plead guilty to the rape charge as he was scheduled to do under the terms of the plea agreement negotiated by the military lawyer which resulted, in our opinion, a much lower sentence by the court. Furthermore, our client now has significant appellate issues in his case that he would not otherwise have.
  • CHARGES WITHDRAWN Navy E-3 Accused of Rape
    • Military Defense
    A Navy E-3 was charged with forcibly raping the same female sailor on three different occasions. The client's military counsel recommended client waive the Art. 32 and sign a pretrial agreement to some lesser charges of sexual assault, where he would face a BCD and six months in the brig. We were retained just prior to the case proceeding to trial on the guilty plea. We were able to get the case back on track for an Article 32 Investigation, after which all charges were WITHDRAWN.
  • CHARGES DISMISSED Army E-6 Accused of Rape of Female Soldier
    • Military Defense
    Army E-6 reservist was charged with the rape of another soldier in his unit while deployed to Afghanistan, as well as the assault upon another female soldier and adultery. During our extensive cross examination of the complainants at the Art. 32 investigation, numerous inconsistencies were developed resulting in the recommendation of the investigating officer to DISMISS the rape and assault charges. We were thereafter able to secure dismissal of the charges conditioned upon our client accepting an Art. 15 for adultery. At the Art. 15 hearing, our client was not reduced, and was finally allowed to return home after many months of being held beyond his release date from active duty.
  • NOT GUILTY Army E-5 Accused in Rape of Junior Soldier
    • Military Defense
    Army E-5 was charged with rape and indecent assault of a junior soldier in the barracks. Upon questioning by CID, our client gave significantly contradictory versions of events. One of his "friends" appeared at trial and testified as to differing stories that our client gave to him - from nothing happened, to they had sex. Our client's DNA was found on the woman's shirt after the alleged rape. Although our client was convicted of the indecent assault on an earlier occasion, the jury found our client NOT GUILTY of rape. Our client never took the witness stand. On sentencing, although he was sentenced to a BCD and assorted other punishments for the indecent assault charge, he was NOT SENTENCED TO CONFINEMENT.
  • NOT GUILTY - REDUCED CHARGES Air Force NCO Accused of Domestic Sex Charges
    • Military Defense
    Air Force NCO was charged with rape of his daughter, forcible sodomy of his wife, 4 assaults upon his wife and threatening to kill his wife. At the Art 32, his wife alleged for the first time that he also raped her, so a charge of raping his wife was also referred to a General Court-Martial. After a contentious members trial, the jury found him NOT GUILTY of all offenses, except 2 specifications of assault upon his wife, and a lesser included offense of indecent acts with his daughter - that offense carried a mandatory sex offender registration. Although he was sentenced to serve 6 months of confinement, reduction to E-1, total forfeitures of pay and allowances, he was not punitively discharged. In our post-trial submissions, we were able to secure the disapproval, and DISMISSAL of the sex offense charge of indecent act upon his daughter which will eliminate the requirement of our client to register as a sex offender.
  • CHARGES REDUCED Navy E-9 Accused of Rape
    • Military Defense
    Navy E-9 was charged with rape and sexual harassment of an E-6 subordinate. The complainant alleged that our client raped her while she was intoxicated, and possibly drugged. During the course of the Art 32 investigation, through aggressive cross-examination of the complainant, we were able to effectively invalidate the rape complaint. The rape charge was withdrawn after the Art 32 in a negotiated agreement which provided for our client accepting non-judicial punishment for sexual harassment and fraternization, upon the condition of our client being able to retire after the NJP proceedings.
  • CHARGES WITHDRAWN Air Force E-5 Accused of Rape
    • Military Defense
    Air Force E-5 was charged with rape of a junior service-member. After extensive cross-examination revealed several inconsistencies and other problems with the complainant’s testimony at the Art. 32 hearing, the charge was WITHDRAWN.
  • NOT GUILTY - CHARGES REDUCED Coast Guard E-4 Accused of Multiple Charges
    • Military Defense
    Coast Guard E-4 was charged with rape, indecent assault, adultery, indecent act and disobeying a lawful order (fraternization). Our client got himself involved in a sexual relationship with a married non-rate member of his command. Evidence presented at trial was that on the night of the alleged rape, our client sexually assaulted and raped the complainant in a sleeping bag while another member of the command was in the same room and that after the alleged rape, our client told the other service member that it was “his turn” with the complainant. When questioned by the investigators, our client made two separate incriminating statements where he indicated that the complainant pushed him off of her, said “not tonight” and that he “forced” her legs apart to have sex with her. Prior to proceeding to a member’s trial on the charges of rape and indecent assault, we plead our client Guilty to the offenses of disobeying the lawful order, adultery and indecent act (having sex with another person present). After intensive cross-examination of the complainant, we elected to rest our case without putting on any evidence whatsoever. The members quickly returned a verdict of NOT GUILTY to the offenses of rape and indecent assault. The members then needed to adjudge a sentence for the offenses that we plead our client Guilty to - the prosecution asked for a sentence of reduction to E-1, a BCD and confinement for one year. After our argument, the members imposed a sentence of reduction of one pay grade to E-3, and 45 days of hard labor without confinement.
  • NOT GUILTY Marine Recruiter Accused of Rape
    • Military Defense
    Marine recruiter (E-5) was charged with recruiter misconduct involving 2 female recruits, as well as multiple sexual assault charges, including 2 specifications of rape, and forcible sodomy. After the Art 32 investigation, all charges related to one of the recruits were withdrawn as a result of the aggressive cross examination of the recruit. The second recruit did not testify at the Art 32, so the charges involving that recruit were referred to a Special Court-Martial. At the Special Court-Martial, we were able to prevent the prosecution from bringing in a third female recruit to testify as to uncharged misconduct with that recruit. Although our client was convicted of one specification of violation of a regulation regarding recruiter conduct, he was found NOT GUILTY of all sex related charges, and was sentenced to a one grade reduction, and letter of reprimand.
  • CHARGES WITHDRAWN Navy E-8 Accused of Rape
    • Military Defense
    Navy frocked E-8 with over 22 years of service was accused of rape of a junior enlisted female by administering to her a drug/intoxicant without her knowledge which substantially impaired her ability to appraise her conduct, and in the alternative, rape by engaging in a sexual act with her while she was substantially incapacitated. After extensive cross examination during the Article 32 of the complainant, and her “best friend” who told her she had been raped, the investigating officer recommended withdrawal of the charges. Our client’s command agreed, and the CHARGES WERE WITHDRAWN – our client is now able to continue his outstanding career.
  • NOT GUILTY Accused of Rape of Stepdaughter
    • Military Defense
    Second Class Petty Officer was charged with the forcible rape and sexual assault of his twelve-year-old stepdaughter. Government witnesses alleged that the client drugged the child before raping her. Extensive evidence was presented by government and defense expert witnesses on the "rape trauma syndrome." Case proceeded to a General Courts-Martial, where client was found NOT GUILTY of the rape and sexual assault charges by an enlisted jury.
  • ACQUITTED Sexual Assault of Family Member
    • Military Defense
    An E-6 in the Navy was charged with raping and sexually abusing his stepdaughter while photographing and videotaping the sex acts. Two independent witnesses testified that they allegedly saw the video tape of the accused having sex with the child. Client was offered a seven year pretrial agreement, but we rejected it and took the case to an enlisted jury, where he was ACQUITTED of all charges.
  • ACQUITTED Accused of Rape of Child
    • Military Defense
    A Navy E-2 was charged with raping a fourteen-year-old with a couple of his friends. The girl named our client as the rapist, and after hours of interrogation by NCIS, our client signed a sworn statement wherein he admitted to being the rapist. At trial we were able to convince a jury that his confession was not reliable and that the girl misidentified the client. He was ACQUITTED of all charges.
  • REDUCED SENTENCE Sexual Offenses Involving Minors
    • Military Defense
    Navy enlisted member retained us after he had signed a pretrial agreement negotiated by his military lawyer which called for him to plead guilty to several sexual offenses involving minors and capped his confinement at 42 months. Upon entering the case, we withdrew from the pretrial agreement, filed pretrial motions and eventually were able to renegotiate the pretrial agreement for a confinement cap of 21 months, SAVING OUR CLIENT 21 MONTHS OF CONFINEMENT.
  • ACQUITTAL Forcible Rape - Sodomy of Family Member
    • Military Defense
    Civilian was charged in state court with rape and two counts of forcible sodomy of his step-daughter. Prior to trial, we secured a favorable ruling from the Court which prevented the prosecution from presenting evidence obtained during a physical examination of the child. Extensive defense cross-examination of the child developed significant issues as to the credibility of the child. After the prosecution rested its case, we concluded that the best course was not to present any evidence, so we rested our case. The jury returned an ACQUITTAL on all charges in 50 minutes.
  • CHARGES WITHDRAWN Sexual Relations with Underage Girls
    • Military Defense
    A junior Air Force enlisted man was charged by civilian authorities with several offenses related to engaging in sexual relations with underage girls. We secured the WITHDRAWAL of all charges prior to the preliminary hearing.
  • CHARGES WITHDRAWN Aggravated Sexual Battery of Family Member
    • Military Defense
    Air Force NCO charged by civilian authorities with Aggravated Sexual Battery and Indecent Liberties with his step daughter was found NOT GUILTY of the Indecent Liberties charge and the jury DEADLOCKED on the remaining charge resulting in a MISTRIAL. The prosecution did not proceed any further on the charge the jury deadlocked on and that charge was WITHDRAWN.
  • DISCHARGE IN LIEU OF COURT-MARTIAL Sexual Assault of Family Member
    • Military Defense
    Navy E-5 plead guilty and was convicted in state court of sexual assault upon his young step-daughter and was sentenced to serve 123 months in state prison, with all but 4 months suspended, conditioned up participation in an intense sexual offender treatment and probation program. The command was extremely dissatisfied with the sentence of the state court, and upon his release from state jail, immediately placed him into pretrial confinement with the intention of taking him to a General Court-Martial. Military defense counsel attempted to persuade the Navy to terminate court-martial proceedings, however the command insisted on the case proceeding to trial. Our law firm was retained after pretrial negotiations were initiated, with the command taking the position that the lowest cap on confinement that the command would agree to was 14 years. Upon our retention, we immediately challenged the assumption of jurisdiction by the Navy after the state concluded its prosecution. In an effort to avoid our client being court-martialed, we submitted a request for discharge in lieu of court-martial. The case proceeded to the Art. 32 hearing, at which time we were able to establish that our client was not properly advised of his rights by a NCIS agent during his interrogation that was conducted primarily by the civilian police. After the Art. 32, the command APPROVED OUR REQUEST FOR DISCHARGE IN LIEU OF COURT-MARTIAL and our client was discharged from the Navy with an OTH and immediately released from pretrial confinement to start participation in the state sexual offender treatment and probation program.
  • CHARGES WITHDRAWN Forcible Rape of Family Member
    • Military Defense
    A Seaman was charged with forcibly raping and sodomizing his niece. The case proceeded with military counsel through the Article 32 Investigation. Within several weeks of our representation of the client after the Article 32, all charges were WITHDRAWN.
  • NOT GUILTY Rape of Family Member
    • Military Defense
    Navy E-4 was charged with rape, sodomy and indecent acts upon his 10 year old step-daughter, in addition to assorted charges related to opening mail, fraudulent use of credit cards and fraudulent enlistment. We negotiated a pre-trial agreement wherein our client agreed to plead guilty to the non-sex charges, in order to reduce our client's maximum exposure in the event of conviction on the sex charges from life without possibility of parole, to 15 years. We then took the charges of rape, sodomy and indecent acts to a contested trial, with a jury. After extensive cross-examination of the alleged victim and another relative, we rested our case without presenting any evidence. The jury deliberated for only 54 minutes and returned a verdict of NOT GUILTY of all of the sex charges. We then proceeded to the sentencing phase on the remaining charges to which our client entered a plea of guilty and the jury sentenced him to only be reduced to pay grade E-1, and a partial forfeiture of pay for 2 months.
  • NOT GUILTY Sexual Assault of Family Member
    • Military Defense
    Navy E-6 was charged with the rape, sodomy and sexual assault of his stepdaughter over a period of several years. The accusations came out when our client was in Afghanistan and upon his return to the country, he was immediately placed into pretrial confinement. After referral of charges, the government proposed terms for a pretrial agreement with the cap on confinement being 27 years if the agreement was signed before the Art. 32 investigation, as well as other caps ranging from 32 years to life with possibility of parole, depending upon when the pretrial agreement was signed. In addition to the sexual offenses against the child, our client was also charged with sexual assault upon his wife, possession of child pornography, assault and battery on two of his other stepchildren and assorted other offenses that involved theft, transportation and possession of military explosives and ammunition. In addition, the government counsel notified the defense that they intended to present evidence of a prior child sexual assault allegedly committed by our client 17 years earlier. Prior to trial, several charges were withdrawn including the alleged sexual assault of his wife, as well as the child pornography offense. Several weeks before trial, the prosecution provided us with notice of evidence that on its face, appeared to be devastating to our case - that the child's DNA was found on some adult sex toys that the child was at that point saying our client used on her. Prior to trial, we negotiated a pretrial agreement that provided for entry of guilty pleas to some of the military related offenses in exchange for a confinement cap of 17 years if our client was convicted of the sex offenses, yet allowing us to take the sex offenses, as well as the assault and battery charges to a jury. After several days of trial, and four hours of deliberations, the jury returned with a verdict of NOT GUILTY of all charges related to the sexual abuse of the stepdaughter, as well as the assault and battery of the other stepchildren – we secured those ACQUITTALSwithout our client testifying and we presented no evidence in our defense case.
  • RETAINED COMMISSION Child Sexual Molestation
    • Military Defense
    Navy E-7 with 17 years of service was charged by civilian authorities with sexually molesting a 12 year old girl. Prior to our involvement in his case, he entered into a pre-trial diversion agreement (PDA). Unknown to him, this PDA qualified as a "Civilian Conviction" and triggered mandatory separation processing from the Navy. At his subsequent administrative separation board, we convinced the members that the evidence did not support a finding that he committed the alleged misconduct. As a result, our client was RETAINED in the Navy.
  • DISMISSAL OF CHARGES Sexual Abuse of Family Members
    • Military Defense
    Navy E-6 was charged with offenses related to the sexual abuse of his two young step daughters. Before we were retained, a proposed pretrial agreement was drafted that had him entering guilty pleas to 2 specifications of rape, 3 specifications of forcible sodomy and 2 specifications of indecent acts with a child. The Art 32 investigation was also waived prior to our retention and a stipulation of fact that was very adverse to our client was prepared for his signature. Upon retention, we were able to renegotiate the terms of the pretrial agreement which provided for our client pleading guilty to 2 specifications of non-forcible sodomy and 2 specifications of indecent acts with a child. The Government agreed to WITHDRAW and DISMISS the 2 rape charges, as well as the 2 forcible sodomy charges that the original PTA that was proposed had our client pleading Guilty to. We also were able to significantly reduce the adverse nature of the stipulation of fact and reduce the maximum confinement under the terms of the PTA by 2 years.
  • NOT GUILTY Rape of Family Member
    • Military Defense
    Navy E-6 with over 20 years of service faced a General Court-Martial for four specifications of rape of three of his daughters, as well as sodomy and indecent acts with one of the daughters, over a several year period of time. At a member’s trial, our client was found NOT GUILTY OF ALL CHARGES.
  • ACQUITTED Aggravated Sexual Contact With Child
    • Military Defense
    Air Force E-6, with 17 years of service, faced a General Court-Martial for aggravated sexual contact with a child under 12. At trial, the Government introduced evidence, over objection of the defense, that a forensic analysis of our client’s computer revealed that searches for child pornography had been conducted on the computer. Our client’s statement to OSI contained significant adverse information which the Government used, with the argument that our client had searched for child pornography, in its case against our client. After less than two hours of deliberation, our client was ACQUITTED of the charge.
  • NOT GUILTY Navy Sailor's Contributing To The Delinquency Charge
    • Military Defense
    A Sailor contacted us after being charged with Contributing to the Delinquency of a Minor for allegedly barricading himself in a room in his home with his young son. After arguing with his wife, our client allegedly locked himself in a room with his son for several hours. Our client’s wife contacted the police repeatedly and advised that she was worried that the child was not being cared for because our client had been drinking and she was unsure if there were proper sanitary and food items for the baby in the room. The child did, in fact, have all necessary items in the room. After kicking in the door, officers arrested our client. After a contentious hearing, the judge held that our client never actually endangered or contributed to the delinquency of his son and found our client NOT GUILTY.
  • CHARGES DISMISSED Rape - Sexual Assault of Family Member
    • Military Defense
    Army 0-2E with over 20 years outstanding service faced charges of rape and sexual assault of his daughter over several years. At the Art. 32, aggressive cross examination of the child, and her mother, established glaring inconsistencies and lack of credibility as to the allegations. Upon recommendation of the IO, ALL CHARGES WERE DISMISSED, resulting in the immediate promotion of our client that had been held in abeyance due to the charges.
  • Case Dismissed Sexual Acts with a Family Member
    • Military Defense
    Army 0-4 was accused of a sexual act with his 3 year old son, resulting in his receipt of a Military Protective Order which required him to live separate from his family and have no contact with the child. A state family services investigation was also initiated. Upon retaining our firm, we invoked his rights to counsel and to not make any statements. Our client came to our office where we had him undergo a polygraph examination with our polygraph examiner who has handled our polygraphs for over 20 years. The polygraph examination reflected No Deception Indicated when our client denied any inappropriate contact with his son. Shortly after we provided a copy of the polygraph report to the Government, we were advised that the state family services investigation was closed, as UNFOUNDED. After several weeks of continued CID investigation, we were then advised that the Military Protective Order was lifted, allowing our client to return home. Several days later, we were advised that the CID investigation was complete, and that our client's command determined that NO ACTION would be taken against our client.
  • NAVY E-7 CLEARED Sex Assault Accusations
    • Military Defense
    Navy E-7 was investigated by civilian police and NCIS for sexual assault upon a civilian female. Upon retention, we contacted the civilian police, NCIS and our client's command to immediately terminate efforts to interview our client. Our client was then served with an emergency protective order entered against him by the civilian court. When we appeared at the protective order hearing, Greg McCormack subjected the complainant to extensive cross examination, having a court reporter to transcribe that testimony for use in the defense of the sexual assault accusations. The civilian court dismissed the protective order after the cross examination. Once we had the transcript from that hearing, we contacted the civilian detective and advised that we would agree with our client being interviewed at the NCIS office, with Greg McCormack being present at all times during the interview. During that interview, we provided a copy of the transcript from the protective order hearing to both the civilian detective and NCIS. Eventually we were advised the civilian prosecutor did not intend to prosecute, however the case remained under investigation by NCIS. Prior to the commencement of the investigation, our client had been selected to be commissioned as an officer, however his commissioning was put in a hold status pending the investigation. After the civilian prosecutor declined to prosecute, our client was permitted to proceed with his commissioning, however we still had not received final word as to the Navy investigation. Several months later, our client finally received orders to his new command, with the investigation being closed in his favor.
  • NOT GUILTY Army Child Rape/Sex Assault Case
    • Military Defense
    Army E-4 charged with rape and sexual assault of his step-daughter over several years. The child and mother refused to testify at the Art. 32. At trial, after our intense cross examination of the child, her mother, her father and close friend who she allegedly first disclosed the allegations to, the military judge dismissed the rape and carnal knowledge charges on our motion to enter a finding of not guilty for lack of evidence of penetration. After our client testified in his defense, the jury returned a verdict of NOT GUILTY as to the remaining charges.
  • ARMY NCO CLEARED RAPE ACCUSATIONS
    • Military Defense
    Army reserve E-5 retained our firm while under investigation for rape of a 17 year old reserve recruit. During her attendance as the first Battle Assembly, our client provided her with alcohol and ended up having sexual relations with her in the barracks. After attending Basic Training and attending a Sexual Assault Awareness class, she "realized" that she had been raped by our client and filed a report. During the investigation, witnesses brought to light the fact that the complainant had maintained contact with our client after the alleged rape. When confronted by CID, the complainat admitted she had sexual relations with our client one time after the alleged rape. The command elected not to court-martial our client, but gave him a GOMOR for providing alcohol to her, getting her intoxicated to the point of being unable to resist or refuse consent, and sexually assaulting her. Nearly 2 years later, our client was taken to an administrative separation board for fraternization and aggravated sexual assault. On cross examination, we got the complainant to admit she repeatedly lied to CID, and had in fact engaged in sexual relations with our client on 4 additional occasions. The board found our client did committ fraternization, but did not committ aggravated sexual assault, and RETAINED our client.
  • JUDGE ALONE VERDICT OF NOT GUILTY CHILD SEX ASSAULT CASE
    • Military Defense
    Our client was charged with sexually assaulting his brother's 12-year-old daughter. At trial by judge alone, after extensive cross examination of the girl, and her mother, we rested our case without presenting any evidence. The judge, without deliberating, immediately found our client NOT GUILTY.
  • JURY VERDICT OF NOT GUILTY SEX ASSAULT
    • Military Defense
    Our client passed out in a friend's room after consuming a significant amount of alcohol. The roommate was in bed with a female, when the female reportedly awoke to a hand fondling her genitalia. The roommate woke up and found our client laying on the floor next to the bed, with his zipper down. After kicking our client out of the room, and later physically attacking our client for what he allegedly had done to the woman, our client was charged with sexually assaulting the woman. Without putting our client on the witness stand or presenting any evidence, the jury found our client NOT GUILTY of sexual assault.
  • FOUND NOT GUILTY OF BOTH SPECIFICATIONS Two Charges Of Sexual Assault
    • Military Defense
    Air Force E-7 with 18 years of service was charged with two specifications of abusive sexual contact involving an E-6 that he had a brief prior sexual relationship with. Although several months passed before she filed a complaint with OSI, the day of the alleged offense she told several co-workers that our client had sexually assaulted her. During cross examination of the alleged victim, as well as testimony of additional witnesses, we established that she gave her coworkers, and a counselor different versions of the incident and did not file the complaint against our client until he had requested that her supervisor replace her due to duty performance issues. Our client was found NOT GUILTY of both specifications without taking the witness stand.
  • SOLDIER ACQUITTED Rape And Forcible Sodomy
    • Military Defense
    Army E-3 in Korea went out for an evening with another E-3. After going to several clubs in the local community, they went to a hotel and engaged in sexual relations. The next morning, the female soldier returned to her command and was immediately confronted by her supervisor for missing a telephone alert, to which she responded to the effect that she had been “partying and overslept”. Shortly afterwards, she advised that supervisor that she had been at a hotel with another soldier, started out with mutual sexual activity, but then repeatedly told our client to “stop” and that she did not want to engage in anal sex with him, which she said he ignored and continued despite her wishes. Upon medical examination, several superficial tears were found in the vagina/anal area. Although after the Art. 32 examination, it was expected that the charges would be withdrawn, the command referred the charges to a General Court-Martial. After extensive cross-examination of the complainant, we did not present any evidence – the jury returned with a verdict of NOT GUILTY to both the rape and forcible sodomy charges after only one hour of deliberations.
  • NOT GUILTY Sailor Charged with Rape and Sexual Assault on Board Aircraft Carrier
    • Military Defense

    Navy E-5 charged with rape and sex assault charges involving 2 females in his command. After the Art. 32 hearing, the government withdrew charges related to one of the alleged victims, however the charges as to the remaining alleged victim went to general court-martial. At trial, the government brought the other alleged victim in as a witness, asserting that the alleged sex assault of her showed our client's propensity to sexually assault an intoxicated female using force by strangulation. Aggressive cross-examination of both alleged victims, as well as several witnesses who testified that the one charged alleged victim had serious physical injuries to her face and body, clearly established that the witnesses were not truthful.

    The alleged rape occurred on an aircraft carrier and the scene of the alleged crime had our client's blood on the floor and walls - the complainant asserted that she was highly intoxicated, past out and woke up to the rape in progress, at which time she scratched our client's back while he was raping her. Three weeks after the alleged assault, a medical examination was conducted on our client and he still had several scratch marks on his back. We acknowledged that our client screwed up by having sex on the ship, but asserted the scratches on her back were the result of the female engaging in rough sex with our client. Without putting our client on the stand to testify, the jury returned a verdict of NOT GUILTY to all charges.

  • NOT GUILTY VERDICT Full Confession To Violent Rape
    • Military Defense

    Navy E-3 was charged with RAPE of a female sailor in his command, as well as AGGRAVATED ASSAULT with a means likely to inflict death or grievous bodily injury and FALSE OFFICIAL STATEMENT (lying to NCIS), in addition to SEXUAL ASSAULT upon another sailor in his command, and PROVIDING ALCOHOL to that underage sailor. At the Art. 32, we were able to secure an acknowledgment from the one sailor that she had no basis to contend that our client had sexually assaulted her as well as an admission that she made the accusation in an effort to avoid getting in trouble for underage drinking and being late to muster. After the Art. 32, the charges related to the one sailor were withdrawn and we went to a General Court-Martial on the rape, aggravated assault and false official statement charges. At the end of to our client's first NCIS interrogation, where he denied raping the sailor, he agreed to take an NCIS polygraph.

    Two months later during a deployment, our client was flown off the ship to take the polygraph. After he was told that the polygraph indicated he was lying, he subsequently provided a signed, WRITTEN CONFESSION admitting to the violent rape and aggravated assault of the sailor, and lying in his first statement to NCIS. At trial, the defense successfully challenged the entire jury panel on the grounds of improper jury selection by the convening authority which systematically excluded anyone in the pay-grade below E-7 from being on the panel. The new jury panel had 17 members on it, 7 of which were in the paygrade of E-6. After Mr. McCormack's intense cross examination of not only the alleged victim, as well as the polygraph examiner and lead NCIS agent, the jury returned a verdict of NOT GUILTY to the rape and false official statement. Our client did not testify and we presented no evidence. Although our client was convicted of a lesser included offense of simple assault and battery, he was sentenced to NJP equivalent punishment.

  • Verdict of Not Guilty Sexual Assault
    • Military Defense
    Navy physician (LT) on an aircraft carrier was investigated by NCIS for sexually assaulting nine (9) female patients while conducting pelvic examinations. The convening authority initially referred charges relating to seven of those patients to general court-martial. Shortly before trial, the government withdrew charges related to four of the accusers. At trial, Mr. McCormack secured an examination table and training models to be used in the court room during trial as demonstrative exhibits in front of the jury to show the procedures for pelvic examinations. Through cross examination of the government’s expert, which resulted in characterization of our client’s treatment of the accusers as “impeccable” , as well as aggressive cross examination of the NCIS agent and the three accusers, the jury returned a verdict of NOT GUILTY to all five charges of sexual assault against our client. Our client did not have to take the witness stand based upon the effectiveness of the confrontation of the government’s case by Greg McCormack.
  • DEFERRED DISMISSAL Refusal Of Random Military Car Search
    • Military Defense
    We were retained by a civil service employee to represent her in court on a charge of obstructing justice. The employee was accused of interfering with the military police in the performance of their duties for not allowing them to search her vehicle and otherwise non-compliance with their orders after being randomly stopped for a car search. After several attempts by the police to get her to allow them to search her vehicle, she steadfastly refused to cooperate. This led to her being arrested and charged with obstructing justice. At trial, we argued that due to the circumstances and our client’s clean record, she should not be convicted and asked the court to defer the finding. The court ultimately agreed and imposed a deferred finding whereby the charge will be dismissed if our client commits no other violations of the law during the deferral period.
  • Secretary of the Navy retained the officer Navy O-4
    • Military Defense

    Notified that although recommended for continuation by Active Duty Navy Lieutenant Commander Staff Continuation Selection Board, the Secretary of the Navy withheld the nomination for continuation due to a previously reported criminal incident. Represented by McCormack & McCormack, the officer submitted a response to the Secretary of the Navy for consideration in determining suitability for continuation. Upon review of the evidence presented to rebut, explain, and mitigate, the information in the report of investigation, the Secretary of the Navy retained the officer for continued service.

  • requested relief granted Army CW2
    • Military Defense

    General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR) issued to Army CW2, due to a civil offense/conviction. The report was subsequently filed in the performance section of the officer’s Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). Represented by McCormack & McCormack, the officer submit a request to the Army Suitability Evaluation Board (DASEB) for transfer of the letter of reprimand to the restricted section of the OMPF. Upon review of the evidence presented, attesting to why the GOMOR should be transferred, the Board found the GOMOR had served its intended purpose, and that it was in the best interest of the Army to transfer the letter of reprimand – requested relief granted.

  • Separation for Cause Was Not Warranted Navy O-3
    • Military Defense

    Navy O-3: Administrative action requiring show cause for retention was initiated against Navy O-3, due to misconduct and substandard performance of duty, as a result of two allegations of conduct unbecoming an officer and gentleman by being drunk and disorderly in the presence of junior enlisted members and civilians, and by wrongfully using reproachful words toward a second class petty officer. Our client, a Medical officer, was assigned to a sea going command, and was found guilty of those offenses at NJP. After NJP, the command recommended that our client be required to Show Cause for retention, and be detached for cause (DFC). Our client elected the right to be heard before a Board of Inquiry. Represented by McCormack & McCormack, the Board of Inquiry, upon hearing and considering all the evidence presented, found that although the preponderance of evidence did support the misconduct reasons for separation and the substandard performance, separation for cause was not warranted for the officer, who was therefore retained.

  • Board Voted 3/0 for No Misconduct Navy EOD Chief Accused of THC in System
    • Military Defense
    Navy EOD Chief with over 16 years of service came up positive on a random urinalysis for THC. Client had purchased CBD oil which stated on its label “Contains 0% THC” to use for pain relief after 3 surgeries relating to fracturing his leg in a parachute training accident. After the urinalysis, the command provided notice to all hands as to risk of THC content in CBD oils, at which time client immediate ceased using the product. Client was advised to refuse NJP which triggered the command initiating administrative separation action against him. At the administrative separation board, significant evidence was submitted regarding CBD oil and hemp products which are commonly available. The government lab expert acknowledged that CBD oil routinely contains THC, regardless of the labeling on the product, and further acknowledged that the Navy exchange sells hemp products which can contain THC and could result in a positive urinalysis. Also addressed was the state of uncertainly as to the military’s policy as to hemp and CBD oil products. We did not contest the drug lab results, relying upon the use of CBD oil which at the time of use was not a prohibited product. In our client’s defense, we submitted 29 letters attesting to our client’s outstanding military career, including multiple combat deployments. We also had several EOD personnel testify in his defense. The board resulted in a 3/0 vote for no misconduct, saving our client’s career.
  • NO MISCONDUCT Accused of Rape of Daughter
    • Military Defense

    Navy E-7 faced allegations of raping and sexually assaulting his daughter. Although the command elected not to prosecute, Family Advocacy forwarded to Naval Personnel Command that their investigation substantiated the allegations, which resulted in our client’s retirement being canceled and processed for administrative separation, which could result in the loss of his career and benefits. At the administrative separation board, we scored a 3/0 vote for NO MISCONDUCT. Our client will now be able to retire.

  • DID NOT COMMIT Accused of Rape of Wife
    • Military Defense

    Air National Guard E-7 was accused of rape of his wife who was an ANG officer. It took approximately three years for the case to work its way through the National Guard system. The command refused to produce a copy of the video recordings of the interviews of the complainant and other witnesses. While that required an advance trip to the National Guard headquarters, it was well worth the trip since the recording of the complainant’s interview revealed significant information about allegations the complainant had made against another ANG member of sexually assaulting her on three separate occasions, with a weapon being involved on each occasion. Prior to our administrative separation hearing, the counsel for the complainant filed a motion to preclude our use of that information at our client’s board. Despite the protests of her counsel, we prevailed on the issue and were able to present the video of the entire interview before the board, to include the prior allegations of sexual assault on three separate occasions. Her counsel then attempted to limit our ability to cross-examine the complainant and argue that issue. Despite those efforts, we were successfully able to get that information to the members and with the effective cross-examination of the complainant and other evidence we were able to produce, we prevailed at the board, by a unanimous vote, to establish that our client DID NOT COMMIT the serious offense he was charged with.

  • Case Closed Navy O-4
    • Military Defense

    Administrative action requiring show cause for retention was initiated against the officer due to (1), misconduct (wrongful use of a controlled substance); (2), substandard performance (a record of marginal service over an extended time); and (3), substandard performance (failure to conform to prescribed standards of military deportment – physical readiness program failures). The officer elected the right to be heard before a Board of Inquiry. Represented by McCormack & McCormack, the Board of Inquiry, upon hearing and considering all the evidence presented, found that the misconduct and the record of marginal service reasons were not supported by sufficient evidence. Although the Board of Inquiry found that the failure to conform to prescribed standards of military deportment reason was supported by the evidence, the officer was not recommended for separation. The case closed, all proceedings terminated. Client can now retire after 29+ years of service.

  • NO MISCONDUCT Navy E-6 faced two sex assault accusations
    • Military Defense

    Navy E-6 faced administrative separation action after NCIS investigation of two sex assault accusations. At the administrative separation board, we secured a finding of NO MISCONDUCT as to both allegations.

  • Plea Agreement Navy E-9 Faced with Rape and Aggravated Sexual Assault Charges
    • Military Defense

    Navy E-9 with 28 years of service faced court-martial charges for attempted rape and two specifications of aggravated sexual contact. After the Art. 32 preliminary hearing, the case was heading towards referral to a General Court-Martial, where our client would have faced the possibility of many years of confinement, dishonorable discharge, loss of retirement, reduction to E-1, and total forfeiture of pay and allowances. If convicted of any of the charged offenses, he would also be looking at a lifetime of sex offender registration. Prior to referral, we were able to negotiate a Pre-Trial Agreement in which the case was referred to a Special Court-Martial, on a guilty plea to just one offense of assault and battery. That reduced charge eliminated any risk of confinement over 6 months and more importantly eliminated the risk of sex offender registration. At the Special Court-Martial, upon the guilty plea to assault and battery, the prosecutor argued for a sentence of Reduction to E-6 and 60 days of confinement. Greg McCormack argued for a sentence of a letter of reprimand. The judge imposed a sentence of forfeiture of $ 500 per month for 2 months, and a letter of reprimand. The Plea agreement provided for disapproval of any forfeitures, so the sentence which was imposed, letter of reprimand, is exactly what Greg McCormack asked for.