Virginia Beach

Military Defense Case Results

  • Officer Separation


    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.

  • Separation for being a homosexual


    A military member may be processed for administrative separation by reason of either being a homosexual (i.e., a "status" case) or by engaging in homosexual acts (i.e., an "acts" case). If a person is either homosexual or has engaged in homosexual acts, that person will be separated from the military unless all specified "retention criteria" are met. Prior to contacting our firm, an Army O-3 self-referred and requested administrative separation based upon "being homosexual" (i.e. a "status" case). At that time the officer was represented by an attorney and, because that attorney provided very limited information to the administrative separation Board of Inquiry, the end result was that the officer was retained in the service. This result occurred because, by limiting the information presented, the Board found that all of the "retention criteria" were met, which permits a homosexual member to be retained in the service. Sometime after that administrative separation process was concluded, we were retained to assist the officer and we were able to obtain an Honorable Discharge on the basis of engaging in homosexual acts (i.e., an "acts" case). Because there had been a previous processing of the case, there were substantial concerns with the possibility of false official statement allegations or other possible adverse consequences that would not normally be present in handling a separation on the basis of homosexuality or homosexual acts. By our handling of the case, we were able to achieve the client's desired result of separation, with an Honorable Discharge and no adverse consequences.

  • Navy Man Charged With Shipmate Rape


    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.



    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.

  • Multiple Sex Offense Charges


    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.

  • Aggravated Sexual Assault Charge


    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.

  • Sailor Pleads Guilty At Njp To Wrongful Sexual Contact


    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.

  • Sexual Assault of Family Member


    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.

  • Forcible Rape of Family Member


    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.

  • Capital Murder & Rape Charge


    Navy enlisted member was one of several men charged in state court with the brutal capital murder and rape of a young dependent wife. Our client confessed to being involved in the rape, but said he left before the woman was murdered by the others. Through extensive pretrial investigation, we were able to determine that the police had placed an informant in jail with one of the co-defendants. We secured an Order from the Court that the informant was required to testify in advance of trial at which time he testified that he overheard our client talking with the co-defendant to the effect that our client admitted that he stabbed the victim. After he testified, we were able to secure recantation of the informant’s testimony to eliminate that testimony which would have come against us at trial after our client had testified. Despite the fact that three co-defendants also implicated our client in the murder, we were able to secure a pre-trial reduction of the capital murder charge to premeditated murder, and then at trial, we secured an ACQUITTAL of the murder charge. Although our client was convicted of rape, based upon his confession, we were able to secure an extremely light sentence of eight and one-half years. Four other co-defendants were each convicted of murder and rape and each were sentenced to two life terms. This case attracted national attention and was the subject of a television documentary which featured Mr. McCormack.

Page of 25

Contact Our Virginia Beach
Criminal Defense Lawyers

Call (888) 490-0876 or use our quick contact form to send us your questions today.
  • Please enter your name.
  • This isn't a valid email address.
    Please enter your email address.
  • This isn't a valid phone number.
    Please enter your phone number.
  • Please select an option.
  • Please enter a message.