Battles Won

Fort Hood, Texas. An Army Staff Sergeant (E-6) accused of maltreatment and other conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline hired MJA to defend him against the false allegations. Working with MJA, the Staff Sergeant refused Article 15 and demanded trial by court-martial. Almost two years after the false allegations were filed, MJA successfully contested all the charges at a Special Court-Martial. At trial, the military judge responded to an MJA motion by finding the Staff Sergeant not guilty of two of the allegations before the court. The members found the Staff Sergeant not guilty of the two remaining allegations, resulting in a full acquittal!

Close

Fort Cavazos, Texas. An Army Staff Sergeant (E-6) faced a general court-martial for murder after a deadly shooting incident in Texas. MJA mounted a vigorous self-defense strategy, demonstrating that the Staff Sergeant acted lawfully to protect himself and others. At trial, MJA effectively cross-examined witnesses and highlighted forensic evidence supporting the self-defense claim. After deliberation, the panel found the Staff Sergeant NOT GUILTY, fully acquitting him of all charges and allowing him to continue his military career without conviction or punishment. (January 2025)

Read more about this case here.

Close

Marine Corps Base Quantico, Virginia. A Marine Corporal was acquitted of assault and sexual assault of another Marine. The Military Judge took less than one hour to find the Corporal not guilty of the charges and specifications at a General Court Martial.

Close

Administrative Discharge Board Found “No Basis” for the Alleged Misconduct.

Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickman, Hawaii. A Master Sergeant (E-7) in the United States Air Force was investigated for 15 months by the Air Force Office of Special Investigations (OSI), Family Advocacy Program (FAP), and Child Welfare Services (CWS) for false allegations of sexually assaulting a minor. After a week-long administrative discharge board with eight Government witnesses, the board members found “no basis” for the alleged misconduct and retained the Master Sergeant on active duty. (December 2024)

Close

Spangdahlem Air Base, Germany. A Senior Airman (E-4) was falsely accused of committing rape and sexual assault against a fellow service member. MJA represented the Senior Airman at his Article 32 hearing and convinced the Preliminary Hearing Officer to recommend dismissal of the rape charge. At trial, MJA exposed the alleged victim’s false claim of sexual assault while being blacked out drunk as spurious and uncorroborated. MJA effectively cross-examined four Government witnesses who directly contradicted the alleged victim’s claim of heavy intoxication and impeached the alleged victim on the stand with forensic evidence found on her person and her clothes seized by OSI. The Military Judge who presided over the general court-martial deliberated for less than 30 minutes before coming back with a verdict of NOT GUILTY on all charges.

Close

Fort Benning, Georgia. Following a motor vehicle accident, a probationary Army Officer was notified of administrative separation ("elimination") for allegations of misconduct, to wit: driving under the influence of alcohol, in violation of Articles 113 and 133, Uniform Code of Military Justice. Faced with the possibility of an Other than Honorable (OTH) discharge, the Soldier retained MJA to zealously advocate for the most favorable outcome. MJA presented robust written matters which provided much-needed context, extenuation, and mitigation, and which significantly undermined the government’s case. After reviewing all the evidence, the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army directed that the Officer receive a FULLY HONORABLE characterization of service upon his discharge from active duty, allowing the Officer to retain all earned benefits and entitlements. (June 2026)

Close

Department of the Army, Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR). A former Captain in the United States Army sought expungement after being titled and indexed for an alleged sexual assault in violation of Article 120, UCMJ. After the Army Criminal Investigation Division (CID) denied the initial expungement request, MJA appealed to the ABCMR to request removal of the titling. MJA submitted substantial evidence showing that there was not probable cause to title the officer for the alleged offense and that expungement was warranted in the interests of justice. Noting that the officer never had an opportunity to challenge the allegation and that the complainant had dropped all charges, the ABCMR unanimously found that the officer experienced an injustice warranting relief. The Board directed that all Department of the Army records relating to the matter be corrected by expunging the officer's name in any DoD law enforcement report and the DoD Central Index of Investigations. Congratulations to this well-deserving client! (May 2026)

Close

Fort Sill, Oklahoma. An Army Officer approaching his 20-year active duty retirement eligibility was notified of administrative separation via "Board of Inquiry" for allegations of misconduct, to wit: conduct unbecoming (e.g., violations of Army Regulation 600-20 for gender and racial insensitivity), in violation of Article 133, Uniform Code of Military Justice. Faced with the possibility of an Other than Honorable (OTH) discharge and no retirement, the Soldier retained MJA to fight for RETENTION and RETIREMENT. MJA zealously advocated for the Officer both before and during the board, discovering evidence which provided much-needed context, extenuation, and mitigation, and which exposed weaknesses and bias in the government’s case. After hearing all the evidence, the members voted to RETAIN the Officer on active duty, allowing him to fulfill his commitment to the U.S. Army and RETIRE. (May 2026)

Close

Fort Meade, Maryland. A Sergeant First Class in the United States Army was notified of a pending felony-level, Army Criminal Investigation Division (CID) investigation regarding an allegation that he engaged in prohibited activities between recruits and recruiters, an offense under Army Regulation 600-78. MJA immediately got involved to provide expert analysis, advice, and counsel to the client, while strategically communicating with law enforcement and command representatives on behalf of the client. Upon completion of the investigation and the subsequent issuance of a written reprimand and recommended removal of the client from Army Recruiting, MJA meticulously dissected the investigation and subsequent adverse administrative action. MJA carefully and comprehensively rebutted the preliminary findings and actions by detailing factual and legal discrepancies, deficiencies, and overall insufficiency. The Commanding Officer ultimately AGREED with MJA and determined there was insufficient evidence to support the allegation. Moreover, the Army directed that the Sergeant First Class be UNFLAGGED and REINSTATED to full recruiting duties and receipt of SDAP! (May 2026)

Close

Millington, Tennessee. A Petty Officer First Class in the United States Navy faced involuntary administrative separation after testing positive for Psilocybin/Psilocin (PSIL) during a random urinalysis. Facing the loss of his military career, the Sailor hired MJA to defend them at an administrative separation board hearing. During the hearing, MJA presented compelling evidence that the positive urinalysis was the result on an innocent or unknowing ingestion of an available (and unmarked) health and wellness product with ingredients designed or included to reduce stress and anxiety. The Board found "NO BASIS" for separation and retained the Sailor on active duty. Congratulations to this well-deserving client! (May 2026)

Close

MacDill Air Force Base, Florida. A Senior Airman (E-4) in the United States Air Force was charged with wrongful use of a controlled substance (MDMA / Ecstasy) in violation of Article 112a, UCMJ, after testing positive on a urinalysis. The Senior Airman retained Military Justice Attorneys (MJA) to defend against the allegation. After thoroughly investigating the evidence, MJA identified numerous problems with the collection, handling, and testing of the alleged positive sample. MJA aggressively fought against the government's case during the court-martial and offered a defense that not only highlighted the Accused's impeccable integrity, loyalty, and service, but also brought attention to legal and factual insufficiencies in their evidence. After a fully litigated Special Court-Martial, the panel (jury) voted to fully acquit the Airman of all alleged misconduct. (April 2026)

Close

U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Division (USACID). An officer in the U.S. Army was titled and indexed during a USACID investigation for alleged violations of Articles 92 and 107, UCMJ. After his initial expungement request was denied, MJA appealed the denial to the CID Office of Chief Counsel, arguing that the agency lacked credible information and probable cause of any alleged offense and previously failed to properly consider non-dispositive factors such as the extent or lack of corroborating evidence against the requestor with respect to the offense at issue, the extent or lack of administrative, disciplinary, or judicial action taken, and the type, nature, and outcome of any such action. Upon review, the Chief Counsel granted the appeal and deleted the officer's NCIC entry associated with the investigation from the FBI database. (March 2026)

Close

Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB). A former Specialist (E-4) in the U.S. Army was involuntarily discharged with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service after failing to complete an alcohol rehabilitation program following his combat deployment to Iraq. MJA petitioned the ADRB for relief, requesting that his petition receive liberal consideration due to service-connected PTSD. After reviewing all the evidence, the Board unanimously determined that the Soldier's discharge was inequitable and upgraded his characterization of service to fully “Honorable.” (March 2026)

Close

Department of the Army, Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR). A Master Sergeant in the United States Army sought expungement after being improperly titled and indexed for alleged domestic assault, assault consummated by battery upon a child, and failure to obey a lawful order, in violation of Articles 128/128b and 92, UCMJ, respectively, as well as for an alleged violation of State criminal law. After getting the Soldier's DNA expunged, MJA submitted substantial evidence to Headquarters, Army Criminal Investigation Division (CID) showing that there was not probable cause to title the Soldier for the alleged offenses. CID improperly denied relief. MJA appealed to ABCMR. Upon reviewing the evidence and arguments presented by MJA, ABCMR agreed that relief was warranted and directed the immediate expungement of ALL titlingentries in the National Crime Information Center (NCIC), Defense Central Index of Investigations (DCII) and Interstate Identification Index (III). Congratulations to this well-deserving client! (February 2026)

Close

NO GOMOR; Army Officer Successfully Rebuts Allegations of Online Social Media Misconduct
Texas. An Officer in the United States Army was threatened with potentially career-ending consequences following a formal Army Regulation (AR) 15-6 command investigation into allegations of online social media misconduct -- i.e., that the client had, through online social media posts, potentially sought personal gain, engaged in racially divisive dialogue, and even compromised operation security, among other service-discrediting conduct -- purportedly in violation of Articles 92, 133, and 134, UCMJ. MJA worked closely with the client to expertly respond to the exaggerated and mischaracterized allegations with the proper tone and to highlight key evidence in defense. In light of the rebuttal submitted to senior leadership for consideration, the Commander disagreed with the findings and recommendations of the investigating officer. No General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR) was issued. The client will now be permitted to continue their honorable service in the Army. Close

Shaw Air Force Base, South Carolina. A Major (O-4) in the United States Army was issued a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR) for extramarital sexual conduct with another Soldier in violation of Article 134, UCMJ. MJA worked closely with the client to respond to the allegation with the proper tone and to highlight key evidence in defense, extenuation, and mitigation. In light of the rebuttal, the Commander directed that the GOMOR be filed locally, where it will be removed after 18 months or when the Officer is reassigned. Local filing will allow the Officer to promote and continue their military career. Close

Fort Stewart, Georgia. An Army Sergeant (E-5) was flagged for allegedly violating a restriction of movement (ROM) order following a suspected case of COVID-19. The Soldier was notified that he would receive a career killing GOMOR or nonjudicial punishment under Article 15. The Sergeant immediately retained MJA to defend against the false allegations. MJA worked closely with the Sergeant to gather and submit evidence to the command showing that he did not violate the ROM. Based on this evidence, the flag was removed, no Article 15 punishment was offered, and the case was closed favorably on behalf of the Sergeant.

Close

Fort Stewart, Georgia. An Army Ranger was arrested for DUI less safe after failing to submit to a field sobriety test. The Ranger was issued a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR) related to the incident, stripped of his Ranger tab, removed from the promotion list, PCS’d to another duty station, and notified that he would be administratively discharged via the Army’s Qualitative Management Program (QMP). After the state court charges were dismissed, MJA worked diligently to have the GOMOR removed from the Soldier’s official record and to terminate his administrative separation under the QMP. With his name cleared, the Ranger was promoted to Sergeant First Class (E-7) and will continue his military career.

Close

Fort Knox, Kentucky. An Army Major facing an investigation and possible removal from the Army contacted MJA to help him respond appropriately. MJA represented the Major in numerous interactions with the Staff Judge Advocate and Investigating Officer. MJA helped the Major craft a response to the GOMOR, resulting in a local filing and no other adverse impact for the Major.

Close

Camp Lejeune, North Carolina. A Marine Staff Sergeant (E-6) was notified of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for allegedly violating Article 92 regarding actions he took while in the field. Working with MJA, the Staff Sergeant refused NJP and demanded trial by court-martial, explaining to his command that he had a lawful reason for his actions. MJA successfully convinced the command to handle the SNCO’s case administratively and restore his pending promotion to E-7.

Close

United States Army Japan. An Army First Lieutenant (O-2) received a permanently filed General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR) for allegedly being drunk and disorderly in violation of United States Force Japan liberty policy. Based on the GOMOR, the 1LT was notified that his promotion to Captain would be delayed and reviewed by a Promotion Review Board (PRB). Facing the potential loss of rank, the 1LT retained MJA to defend against the allegations. MJA worked closely with the 1LT to gather evidence favorable to his case and submit a persuasive rebuttal to the PRB. Based on this rebuttal, the 1LT was retained on the promotion list and recently promoted to Captain.

Close

Army Reserve Support Command. An Army Sergeant First Class (E-7) was issued a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR) for allegedly committing an aggravated sexual contact against another Soldier. Facing an administrative reprimand and potential follow-on Chapter Board, the Sergeant First Class retained MJA to defend against the false allegations. MJA immediately began its own investigation and uncovered exculpatory evidence showing that the Sergeant First Class did not commit the alleged offense. Then, the command took the extreme measure of reissuing the GOMOR and alleging a different date for its accusations. Again, through independent investigation and an exhaustive written explanation to the command of its many errors, MJA again disproved the allegation. Based on this evidence, the Commanding General withdrew and destroyed the GOMOR, allowing the Soldier to continue his military career.

Close

1st Theater Sustainment Command, Middle East. An Army Major was issued a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR) for allegations of extramarital sexual conduct. MJA worked closely with the client to rebut the allegations and stayed in constant communication, even as the client was transported out of the country. Together, the Officer and MJA collected more than 40 witness statements and character references in support. Further, MJA thoroughly explained the legal analysis required to substantiate an allegation of extramarital sexual conduct, which the command had not properly completed. The Officer’s GOMOR was locally filed and promptly destroyed when the Officer moved to their next assignment.

Close

Department of the Army Suitability and Evaluation Board (DASEB). An Army Captain (O-3) received a permanently filed General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR) for being drunk and disorderly. The GOMOR was filed in the performance section of the Soldier’s Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR). MAJ appealed the GOMOR to the DASEB requesting that it be removed or, at a minimum, transferred to the restricted portion of the Soldier’s AMHRR. DASEB by unanimous vote, determined that the evidence was sufficient to warrant partial relief and transferred the GOMOR to the Soldier’s restricted file.

Close

A Master Sergeant (E-8) in the United States Marine Corps was questioned in multiple JAGMAN, command-directed investigations. MJA astutely guided the client in their limited participation while at the same time insulating the client from unwarranted adverse administrative or judicial action. MJA was there at every step to ensure that due process was afforded to its client and that the command’s senior leaders did not abuse their authority. In a very favorable outcome, the command ultimately resolved to close all matters pertaining to the client with only a written counseling and permitted the client to execute DoD SkillBridge (internship opportunity) and process for retirement.

Close

Army National Guard. A Major (O-4) in the Army National Guard was issued a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR) for a violation of a lawful general order. MJA worked closely with the client to respond to the allegation with the proper tone and to highlight key evidence in defense, extenuation, and mitigation. In light of the rebuttal, the Commander directed that the GOMOR be filed locally, where it will be removed after 18 months or when the Major is reassigned. Local filing will allow the Major to promote and continue their military career.

Close

A Captain (O-3) in the United States Army was issued a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR) for failing to comply with the requirements of an Army Regulation. MJA worked closely with the client to respond to the allegation with the proper tone and to highlight key evidence in extenuation and mitigation. In light of the rebuttal, the Commander directed that the GOMOR be filed locally, where it will be removed after 18 months or when the Captain is reassigned. Local filing will allow the Captain to promote and continue his military career.

Close

United States Army Reserve. A Sergeant First Class (E-7) in the United States Army Reserve was initially denied due process in pursuit of a religious accommodation concerning COVID-19 immunization and issued a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR) for allegedly violating the mandate. MJA successfully petitioned for re-processing and consideration of the client’s request for exemption. MJA and the client worked relentlessly to engage the command at every step, presenting accurate analysis of law and regulations as applied to the facts of the client’s case. The Issuing Authority ultimately rescinded the GOMOR, removed the administrative flag, and permitted the client to process for retirement.

Close

Camp Humphreys, Korea. A Sergeant First Class (E-7) in the United States Army was issued a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR) for matters involving alleged false official statements. MJA worked closely with the client to respond to the allegation with the proper tone and to highlight key evidence in defense, extenuation, and mitigation. In light of the rebuttal, the Commander directed that the GOMOR be filed locally, where it will be removed after 18 months or when the Sergeant First Class is reassigned. Local filing will allow the Sergeant First Class to promote and continue their military career.

Close

Camp Humphreys, Korea. A Second Lieutenant (O-1) in the United States Army was investigated in accordance with AR 15-6 for allegations related to fraternization and harassment. MJA elicited the true facts with respect to each allegation and presented them in a manner proving no misconduct occurred. The Appointing Authority carefully considered MJA’s written matters and concurred that a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR) was unwarranted. The Second Lieutenant is now able to promote and continue his military career.

Close

Armed Forces Europe. A Captain (O-3) in the United States Army received a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR) for sexually harassing a subordinate following an administrative investigation. MJA appealed the investigative findings and provided evidence to the command that the Captain did not commit sexual harassment. After reviewing the rebuttal matters, the imposing authority agreed that sexual harassment did not occur and recommended that the reprimand be removed. On appeal, the DASEB agreed that the GOMOR was untrue or unjust and removed the reprimand from the Soldier’s AMHRR.

Close

Marine Corps Base Quantico, Virginia. A Sergeant (E-5) in the United States Marine Corps was investigated for violations of Article 92, UCMJ, violating a lawful order. The command threatened the Sergeant with court-martial should they choose to refuse nonjudicial punishment (NJP). MJA conducted an extremely thorough review and analysis of the completely misinformed and misguided command investigation and reached different factual and legal conclusions. MJA aggressively challenged the findings, opinions, and recommendations of the investigating officer as well as the follow-on determination of the appointing authority. The client made the well-grounded decision to refuse NJP. Thereafter, the command took no judicial action; the Sergeant’s rank and career were retained.

Close

Sixteenth Air Force (Air Forces Cyber). A Technical Sergeant (E-6) in the United States Air Force was administratively demoted to Staff Sergeant (E-5) following the Airman’s lawful refusal of Article 15, Non-judicial Punishment (NJP). MJA petitioned the Appellate Authority for full restoration of rank and related relief. MJA presented evidence on appeal showing that the chain of command seemingly violated the Airman’s rights surrounding protected communications and abused its authority with respect to DAFI 36-2502. The Appellate Authority granted the Airman’s appeal, terminating the demotion proceeding and restoring the Airman’s rank.

Close

Fort Liberty, North Carolina. A Specialist in the United States Army was threatened with potentially career-ending consequences pending a formal Army Regulation (AR) 15-6 command investigation into alleged extramarital sexual conduct (i.e. adultery) and related service-discrediting conduct, in violation of Article 134, UCMJ. MJA worked closely with the client to respond to the frivolous allegations with the proper tone and to highlight key evidence in defense. In light of the rebuttal submitted to the investigating officer for consideration, the Commander directed that no adverse action be taken against the client. The client will now be permitted to continue their honorable service in the Army. (January 2024)

Close

South Carolina. An Officer in the United States Army was issued a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR) for extramarital sexual conduct with another Soldier in violation of Article 134, UCMJ. MJA worked closely with the client to respond to the allegation with the proper tone and to highlight key evidence in defense, extenuation, and mitigation. In light of the rebuttal, the Commander directed that the GOMOR be filed locally, where it will be removed after 18 months or when the Officer is reassigned. Local filing will allow the Officer to promote and continue their military career. (January 2024)

Close

Sailor Submits Request for Redress; Negative Evaluations Removed
U.S. Navy Reserve, Washington D.C. An senior enlisted Sailor in the United States Navy Reserve was improperly (re)issued an Evaluation and Counseling Record and received another inaccurate and unlawfully issued Evaluation. MJA expertly advised the client on the process for requesting redress, or filing a Complaint of Wrongs, pursuant to Navy Regulation and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. On behalf of the client, MJA submitted to the Commanding Officer a request for redress. After carefully considering the actual facts and circumstances as well as the firm's legal analysis and discussion as appropriately articulated in the request, the Commanding Officer granted the requested redress. This extremely favorable outcome will allow the Sailor to be meaningfully considered for promotion and to advance their military career. (August 2024) Close

Fort Benning, Georgia. A Staff Sergeant in the United States Army was notified of Article 15 proceedings after testing positive for Delta-8 Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC-8). Facing the loss of his military career, the Soldier retained MJA to prove his innocence and represent him during Article 15 proceedings. During the hearing, MJA presented compelling testimony and other evidence that the positive urinalysis was the result on an innocent or unknowing ingestion. The Commanding Officer determined there was no wrongful use and found the Soldier "NOT GUILTY" at nonjudicial punishment proceedings. (August 2025)

Close

Department of the Air Force Criminal Justice Information Center (AFCJIC). An honorably discharged Master Sergeant (E-7) in the United States Air Force sought expungement after being titled and indexed on active duty for an alleged sexual assault in violation of Article 120, UCMJ. MJA submitted substantial evidence to the AFCJIC showing that there was no probable cause to title and index the Master Sergeant for the alleged offense. After reviewing the evidence and arguments presented by MJA, the AFCJIC agreed that relief was warrant and expunged the titling entries in the Defense Central Index of Investigations (DCII) and Interstate Identification Index (III). Congratulations to this well-deserving client! (August 2025)

Close

Office of the Governor (Commander-in-Chief, National Guard). An active duty Master Sergeant (E-7) in the Air National Guard was ultimately reduced in rank to Technical Sergeant (E-6) following a nonjudicial punishment (NJP) hearing. The NJP was approved and executed by The Adjutant General of the State's National Guard. The NJP and subsequent demotion were predicated on false and baseless allegations of harassment, to include sexual harassment, as reported in an Equal Opportunity Complaint. MJA petitioned for relief from the Office of the Governor, as Commander-in-Chief for Guardsmen in a Title 32 status. MJA painstakingly analyzed the complete record and found substantial errors, both substantive and procedural. Upon further review by the State, the Office of the Governor found that the applicant had presented evidence sufficient to demonstrate an injustice and directed the client's rank be reinstated with all backpay, allowances, and entitlements, and further directed that all Article 15 related adverse administrative action(s) be removed from the Guardsman's service record. (December 2025)

Close

Newport, Rhode Island. An Officer in the U.S. Navy was investigated and charged after testing positive for cocaine during an all-hands urinalysis. MJA represented the Sailor at an Admiral's Article 15, UCMJ, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) hearing (a/k/a Admiral's Mast) and presented evidence proving the Sailor’s innocent ingestion. The Admiral found that the Government's evidence was insufficient to establish any basis for imposition of NJP. The Sailor will now be permitted to continue their Honorable service in the Navy and to promote. (December 2025)

Close

Department of the Navy, Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS). A Chief Petty Officer in the United States Navy sought expungement after being titled and indexed for an alleged sexual assault in violation of Article 120 and 120(b), UCMJ. After getting the Sailor's DNA expunged, MJA submitted substantial evidence to NCIS showing that there was not probable cause to title the Sailor for the alleged offenses. Upon reviewing the evidence and arguments presented by MJA, NCIS agreed that relief was warranted and expunged the titling entries in the National Crime Information Center (NCIC), Defense Central Index of Investigations (DCII) and Interstate Identification Index (III). Congratulations to this well-deserving client! (January 2026)

Close

No Adverse Action; Army Specialist Successfully Transitions to Individual Ready Reserve After Refusing COVID-19 Immunization
South Carolina. A U.S. Army Reserve Specialist was in the process of involuntary administrative separation with a General (under Honorable conditions) characterization of service after refusing the Army's COVID-19 immunization mandate. The Soldier's command admonished them, telling them never to show up to drill again. The Soldier was the subject of repeated harassment at drill for their firmly held religious beliefs, moral convictions, and matters of conscience. Approximately a year went by and the Soldier was told to report for drill -- the command never fulfilled its promise to separate the Soldier. This time, the Soldier was threatened with involuntary administrative separation with an Other than Honorable characterization of service, carrying with it the loss of more benefits and entitlements and a negative social stigma of dishonorable service. MJA partnered with the Soldier to navigate these troubling waters, including a command that shockingly turned its back on its own Soldier whose reservations were eventually validated. MJA zealously advocated for a resolution in the client's absolute best interest -- one that would have them avoid the same toxic command climate and campaign of harassment, while maintaining the client's Army affiliation, rank, benefits, and entitlements. The command accepted MJA's proposal, and the client was permitted to continue their Honorable service in the Individual Ready Reserve. There, the client remains eligible for reentry to active duty, to return to a drilling status, and/or deployment. Close

No Charges Preferred in Alleged DUI; Marine SNCO to Continue Military Career
MCRD Parris Island, South Carolina. A Staff Non-Commissioned Officer (SNCO) in the U.S. Marine Corps was arrested under suspicion of Driving Under the Influence (DUI) of alcohol on board the military installation. The SNCO was placed on a personnel hold and faced the prospect of court-martial exposing them to a punitive discharge and confinement and/or faced the prospect of an involuntary administrative separation. MJA aggressively defended the client by immediately challenging the patently unlawful stop, unlawful request for a breath alcohol sample, and unlawful arrest. MJA counsel formally submitted to the SNCO's commander and leadership team an accurate and detailed analysis of the law as applied to the actual facts and circumstances in the client's case, highlighting key evidence in their defense. MJA counsel also represented the client before the State's Office of Motor Vehicle Hearings OMVH) concerning the statutory (administrative) suspension of driving privileges for refusing to provide a breath alcohol sample. The client's command elected not to pursue court-martial or administrative separation and lifted the personnel hold. The State's OMVH eliminated any related suspension of driving privileges. The SNCO currently remains eligible for promotion and has been allowed to continue their military career in pursuit of retirement. (February 2024) Close

Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune, North Carolina. A Staff Sergeant attached to the 3d Marine Raider Battalion was retained at his Administrative Separation Board. MJA convinced the Board that the allegations of wrongful use of cocaine were not substantiated.

Close

Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton, California. A Marine Lance Corporal was facing involuntary administrative separation due to a pattern of misconduct. If separated, the Marine risked losing his career and important benefits. MJA was able to rebut the alleged reasons for separation and convince the command to retain the Marine on active duty.

Close

Marine Corps Base Quantico, Virginia. A Marine Corporal (E-4) was recommended for involuntary administrative separation with a General discharge due to Condition Not a Disability. Facing the loss of the GI Bill, the Corporal retained MJA who convinced the command to change its recommendation. The Corporal received an Honorable Discharge upon separation.

Close

Spangdahlem Air Base, Germany. Air Force Staff Sergeant (E-5) was wrongfully accused of sexually assaulting his daughter. After months of preparation, MJA defended the Staff Sergeant at his administrative separation board hearing. MJA convinced the board members that each of the four alleged bases were false, resulting in a finding of no basis. The Staff Sergeant will pick up Technical Sergeant next month!

Close

Training Center Petaluma, California. A Coast Guard Petty Officer Second Class (E-5) accepted nonjudicial punishment and was found guilty of dereliction of duty, false official statement, and obstructing justice. The Commanding Officer recommended administrative separation based on the NJP. MJA represented the Coast Guardsman at his administrative separation board hearing resulting in a finding of no misconduct and a recommendation for his retention on active duty.

Close

Marine Corps Recruit Depot Parris Island, South Carolina. After completing an investigation into recruit abuse, 25 charges were referred to a Special Court-Martial alleging violations of Articles 92, 117, and 128, UCMJ. After months of negotiations and pretrial workup, MJA got the charges dismissed in lieu of a lower forum, avoiding any possibility of a criminal conviction, confinement, or punitive discharge. Not satisfied, the Command then convened an Administrative Separation Board to determine whether the Drill Instructor should be separated from the Marine Corps. MJA represented the Drill Instructor at the Board which, after hearing the evidence and argument, deliberated for less than five minutes before retaining the Marine on active duty.

Close

Camp Lejeune, North Carolina. A Marine Raider pending criminal charges in state court was notified by the separation authority that he might receive a general (under honorable conditions) characterization of service upon his end of active service (EAS). In response, MJA submitted extensive written matters and evidence in support of the Marine, arguing that an honorable characterization of service was appropriate given the totality of the Marine’s enlistment. The separation authority agreed and awarded the Marine an honorable discharge upon his EAS.

Close

Camp Lejeune, North Carolina. A Marine Corporal (E-4) was falsely accused of hazing and his promotion to E-5 was withheld pending the outcome of the investigation. The Corporal adamantly denied any wrongdoing and retained MJA to defend against the false allegations. MJA filed a rebuttal on behalf of the Corporal and provided information to the command to show there was not enough evidence to substantiate the allegations. The command agreed and closed the investigation without action. MJA and the command are working to ensure the Corporal’s promotion to E-5 is backdated to the date he was falsely accused.

Close

Fort Jackson, South Carolina. An Army Drill Sergeant was removed from his duties and offered Article 15 punishment for allegedly engaging in prohibited relationships with multiple female trainees and obstructing justice. MJA advised the Soldier to refuse nonjudicial punishment, resulting in the charges being dropped and not referred to court-martial. Not satisfied, the command initiated a Chapter Board and requested that the Soldier be discharged under Other-Than-Honorable conditions. MJA successfully negotiated to cancel the Chapter Board and award the Soldier a fully Honorable discharge upon separation.

Close

Jacksonville, Florida. The Navy wrongly attempted to force a Petty Officer First Class (E-4) out of the service by alleging that he had “other physical or mental conditions” that did not qualify for referral to a Medical Evaluation Board. MJA collected evidence on the Sailor’s behalf which called into question the command’s actions and the military doctor’s motives, and explained the law and regulations requiring the command to drop the separation action and refer the Sailor to the Integrated Disability Evaluation System. Based on this evidence, the separation action was terminated.

Close

Naval Operations Support Center, San Antonio. A Petty Officer Class First Class (E-6) was notified of nonjudicial punishment for allegedly violating Article 92 by ignoring orders from her Chain of Command. The Petty Officer refused NJP and demanded trial by court-martial, explaining to her command that she had a lawful reason for refusing the orders. The command ignored MJA’s efforts to demonstrate the reasonableness of the Petty Officer’s response and sent a request for legal services requesting administrative separation. MJA represented the Sailor, and along with her detailed counsel, successfully fought to have the board hearing canceled. MJA’s efforts allowed the Sailor to retire medically with an honorable discharge.

Close

MCAS Beaufort, South Carolina. A Corporal (E-4) suspected of violating Article 112a was notified that he could either accept nonjudicial punishment (NJP) and waive his administrative discharge board or face court-martial. After consulting with MJA, the Corporal refused NJP. Despite the threat of court-martial, the Marine was then notified that he would be administratively separated with a general discharge just weeks before his end of active service (EAS), jeopardizing his military benefits. MJA took immediate action and convinced the command to stop administrative processing. The Corporal never went to NJP or court-martial and, unlike other Marines facing the same allegations, was honorably discharged at his EAS.

Close

Camp Lejeune, North Carolina. A Marine Staff Sergeant (E-6) was charged with multiple violations of the UCMJ stemming from allegations of misconduct in his workplace and personal life. MJA worked closely with the Staff Sergeant to ensure he received proper treatment for underlying medical issues while also preparing for his administrative hearing. At the board, MJA successfully demonstrated the Staff Sergeant deserved a discharge under honorable conditions which was suspended while he waits for his medical retirement to be approved.

Close

New Orleans, Louisiana. A Lance Corporal (E-3) in the United States Marine Corps Reserves was notified of administrative separation due to an alleged pattern of misconduct. Faced with the possibility of receiving an Other Than Honorable discharge, the Marine retained MJA to fight the unjust separation action. MJA worked closely with the Marine to submit rebuttal matters showing that the basis for separation had not been met and that the Marine should be retained in the military. After reviewing the rebuttal, the commander changed his mind and terminated the separation action.

Close

U.S. Army Reserve. A Specialist (E-4) in the Army Reserve was notified of involuntary administrative separation for Misconduct – Commission of a Serious Offense, after being arrested for assault and battery with a domestic partner. MJA submitted extensive written matters to the command showing the Soldier was actually the victim of the assault and that his charges were adjudicated and dismissed in civilian court. Based on this evidence, the separation authority approved a conditional waiver (suspended), terminating the separation action and allowing the Specialist to stay in the U.S. Army Reserve.

Close

Camp Pendleton, California. A Marine Lance Corporal (E-3) was accused of violating Article 112a of the UCMJ. MJA helped the young Marine refuse NJP and then fight the charges at his administrative hearing where we successfully showed his vaping activity did not violate Article 112a. The administrative hearing concluded there was no misconduct on the part of the LCpl and returned him to full duty status.

Close

Camp Butler, Japan. A Private First Class (E-2) in the United States Marine Corps was alleged to have sexually assaulted a fellow Marine in her barracks room. Upon being notified by his command that he was under investigation by NCIS for sexual assault, the PFC immediately retained MJA. MJA worked with the Marine to preserve critical evidence to the case and defended him at an administrative separation board. After hearing the evidence presented by MJA, the board unsubstantiated the allegations. The PFC will finish his enlistment under Honorable conditions.

Close

San Diego, California. MJA successfully defended a Navy Hospitalman (E-3) accused of two separate counts of sexual assault. MJA, along with the local DSO attorney, aggressively challenged the false narrative being pushed by the alleged victims and the government resulting in a finding of no basis for either of the allegations. The positive outcome allows the Hospitalman to continue his advancement in the Navy.

Close

Quantico, Virginia. A Sergeant (E-5) in the Marine Corps was taken to an administrative separation board for allegedly violating Article 92, UCMJ, by not receiving a COVID-19 vaccine. During the hearing, MJA admitted extensive evidence showing that it was impossible for the Marine to comply with the COVID-19 vaccine order because the only two FDA approved vaccines—COMIRNATY AND SPIKEVAX—are not available to servicemembers. Based on this evidence, the Board determined there was “no basis” for misconduct and retained the Marine on active duty.

Close

Alameida, California. Allegations of alcohol and drug abuse under Article 112a of the UCMJ led to an administrative hearing for a Coast Guard First Class Petty Officer (E-6). MJA worked closely with the Petty Officer to make sure he was getting the proper treatment and help with underlying medical issues while also preparing for his administrative hearing. Through MJA’s efforts, the board found in favor of the servicemember regarding the alcohol abuse, found no misconduct regarding the 112a, and recommended retention in the Coast Guard.

Close

San Diego, California. A Second Class Petty Officer (E-5) elected to fight his removal from the Naval Service at an Administrative Board Hearing. MJA successfully demonstrated mitigating factors surrounding the alleged misconduct, the treatment received by the Petty Officer and rehabilitation efforts he continues to pursue. The members of the board voted to retain the Sailor on active duty. He is thrilled to be slated for a new assignment.

Close

Camp Lejeune, North Carolina. A Corporal (E-4) in the United States Marine Corps was ordered to return from terminal leave to face a Commanding General directed Special Court-Martial for allegations of sexual harassment. MJA was immediately retained to defend against the false allegations. MJA rebutted the allegations and worked closely with the command to terminate any potential court-martial proceedings and avoid nonjudicial punishment. The Marine successfully completed his active duty service obligation and transitioned to the Ready Reserve.

Close

Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickman, Hawaii. A Master Sergeant (E-7) in the United States Air Force was investigated for 15 months by the Air Force Office of Special Investigations (OSI), Family Advocacy Program (FAP), and Child Welfare Services (CWS) for false allegations of sexually assaulting a minor. After a week-long administrative discharge board with eight Government witnesses, the board members found “no basis” for the alleged misconduct and retained the Master Sergeant on active duty.

Close

Norfolk, Virginia. A Petty Officer in the United States Navy was investigated pursuant to the JAGMAN and Navy EO Manual for alleged harassment of a fellow Sailor. MJA rapidly interceded on behalf of the client to convincingly and accurately convey the full context, facts, and circumstances involved. MJA assisted the client in the preparation and presentation of exculpatory matters aimed at sparing the command and client considerable and needless additional time and expense. MJA succeeded, and the Appointing Authority favorably determined only an informal counseling was appropriate. The client was permitted to continue to service out his military career.

Close

Camp Casey, South Korea. A Sergeant First Class (E-7) in the United States Army retained MJA to defend against multiple false allegations involving a junior Soldier. After refusing to accept Article 15 punishment, in consultation with MJA, the Soldier was taken to a Chapter Board. During the Board, MJA effectively cross-examined the government’s witnesses, including the alleged victim, exposing numerous inconsistencies in their prior statements and a sinister motive to fabricate among the government witnesses. After 30 minutes of deliberation, the Board members unsubstantiated the allegations of sexual harassment and fraternization and recommended the Soldier’s retention in the United States Army.

Close

U.S. Army Human Resources Command. A Sergeant First Class (E-7) in the United States Army was notified of an Immediate Reenlistment Prohibition (IMREPR) Code 13 based on adverse information being officially filed in his Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR), making him eligible for consideration by the Qualitative Management Program (QMP) board. MJA worked with the Soldier to respond to the notification by rebutting the underlying allegations and providing evidence in extenuation and mitigation. After conducting a comprehensive review of the Soldier’s record and his written response, the QMP recommended the Soldier’s retention on active duty.

Close

Fort Liberty, North Carolina. A Soldier nearing his Expiration Term of Service (ETS) was notified of administrative separation for allegations of domestic violence, sexual assault, and adultery. Faced with multiple accusers and the possibility of an Other than Honorable (OTH) discharge, the Soldier retained MJA to fight the allegations. MJA zealously advocated for the Soldier both before and during the board, discovering evidence which contradicted the allegations and exposing weaknesses and bias in the government’s case. After hearing all the evidence, the members unsubstantiated the allegations of sexual assault and domestic violence and voted to RETAIN the Soldier on active duty, allowing him to reach his ETS.

Close

Processing for Involuntary Administrative Separation Withdrawn; Reserve Sailor Returns to Duty Following COVID-19 Immunization Refusal

Texas. A Petty Officer Third Class in the United States Navy Reserve was threatened with termination following their lawful refusal to submit to the Department of Defense and Department of the Navy mandated COVID-19 immunization. As a direct result of courageously voicing their firmly held religious beliefs, moral convictions, and matters of conscience, the Sailor was shunned, warned never to return to duty, and processed for involuntary administrative separation for misconduct. Following the mandate's rescission (and having failed to timely process the Sailor), the command unreasonably pursued involuntary separation for unsatisfactory participation. MJA immediately engaged the Sailor's leadership, exercising proper tone and highlighting key areas of concern which undermined the Government's proposed basis for separation. The command conceded and agreed to amend any unexcused, or unauthorized, absences to authorized absences and gave the client a "fresh start." The client will now be permitted to continue their Honorable service in the Navy Reserve and promote. (March 2024)

Close

Navy Petty Officer Saves His Career

Pensacola, FL. A Navy HM1 (E-6) hired MJA after being wrongfully accused of violating Article 112a after a targeted search of his mail and his off base residence. The HM1 was forced to attend a Disciplinary Review Board in which MJA guided him through his response to the Chiefs who ran the board. MJA advised the HM1 to refuse the Article 15 and demand a court-martial. The Command chose to send the Petty Officer to an administrative separation board in lieu of court. MJA aggressively pushed back against the Government’s arguments and produced witnesses to verify HM1’s account of the events leading up to being falsely accused in this matter. With MJA’s representation and assistance, HM1 successfully convinced the separation board the allegations against the him were not true and the board found NO Misconduct. HM1 will retire early next year with an Honorable Discharge. (May 2024)

Close

Army NCO Utilizes Open Door Policy and Successfully Petitions for Honorable Discharge Characterization
Fort Stewart, Georgia. A Sergeant in the U.S. Army was actively being processed for involuntary administrative separation with a General discharge characterization. The command endeavored to deny the Soldier a board hearing insofar as the Soldier did not have six (6) or more years in service at the time of notification. MJA worked closely with the client to respond to allegations of Unsatisfactory Performance, Chapter 13, with the proper tone and to highlight key evidence in defense, extenuation, and mitigation - including significant health/medical concerns. In light of the carefully drafted, robust MJA rebuttal and the command-authorized Open Door engagement with Soldier and Counsel, the Separation Authority granted the Soldier's request for an HONORABLE discharge, thereby protecting their well-earned educational and medical benefits and entitlements among many others. (September 2024) Close

San Diego, California. An enlisted Sailor faced involuntary administrative separation after testing positive for Delta-9 Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC-9). Facing the loss of his military career, the Sailor hired MJA to defend him at an administrative separation board hearing. During the hearing, MJA presented compelling evidence that the positive urinalysis was the result on an innocent or unknowing ingestion of legally available hemp products. The Board found "NO BASIS" for separation and retained the Sailor on active duty. Congratulations to this well-deserving client! (September 2025)

Close

Camp Lejeune, North Carolina. A Lance Corporal (E-3) in the United States Marine Corps was investigated for 17 months by the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) for an alleged sexual assault, causing his career to be placed on hold while he fought against the false allegation. After the military declined prosecution, the Lance Corporal was notified of administrative separation processing for the alleged offense. The Marine retained MJA to defend him at his board hearing. MJA forcefully confronted the false allegations during the board and introduced substantial evidence to contradict and expose the falsity of the allegations. Based on the evidence presented, the board members found “no basis” for the alleged misconduct and retained the Lance Corporal on active duty, clearing his name and permitting him to execute PCS orders. (September 2025)

Close

Quantico, Virginia. A Sergeant in the United States Marine Corps faced involuntary administrative separation after testing positive for Delta-8 Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC-8) during a unit sweep urinalysis. Facing the loss of his military career, the Marine hired MJA to defend them at an administrative separation board hearing. During the hearing, MJA presented compelling evidence that the positive urinalysis was the result on an innocent or unknowing ingestion of legally available hemp products. The Board found "NO BASIS" for separation and retained the Marine on active duty. Congratulations to this well-deserving client! (September 2025) Close

U.S. Navy Fleet Activities, Yokosuka, Japan. A Machinist's Mate Second Class (E-5) in the United States Navy was investigated for 13 months by the Naval Criminal Investigative Services, Office of Special Trial Counsel, and his Command for allegations that he sexually assaulted three fellow Sailors over a four month period. After the Office of Special Trial Counsel declined to prefer charges, the Command forced the MM2 to non-judicial punishment, where despite his pleas of not guilty, the Commander found the MM2 guilty of sexual assault of three Sailors while on ship, punished him, and then notified him of involuntary separation. At the MM2's board MJA quickly started to dismantle the Government's case by exposing the motive to fabricate shared by all three alleged victims, which created considerable doubt as to whether any or all of the allegations were even remotely true. By a unanimous vote of 3-0, the board members found that the evidence did not meet the preponderance standard, and recommended retention of the MM2. (October 2025)

Close

Fort Jackson, South Carolina. A recruit (Private, E-1) in the U.S. Army was placed in a "holdover" status and investigated for false and baseless allegations of harassment to include sexual harassment, despite themselves being a victim. The recruit was then notified of involuntary separation. MJA carefully assessed the complex legal landscape and rigorously analyzed the record. Having found substantial errors, both substantive and procedural, MJA relentless pursued justice on behalf of its client. This pursuit resulted in the U.S. Army conducting an about-face and retaining the recruit and issuing them orders to Advanced Individual Training ("AIT") (January 2026) Close

Norfolk, Virginia. A Petty Officer Second Class in the United States Navy faced involuntary administrative separation after testing positive for Delta-8 Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC-8) during a unit sweep urinalysis. Facing the loss of his military career, the Sailor hired MJA to defend them at an administrative separation board hearing. During the hearing, MJA presented compelling evidence that the positive urinalysis was the result on an innocent or unknowing ingestion of legally available hemp products. The Board found "NO BASIS" for separation and retained the Sailor on active duty. Congratulations to this well-deserving client! (January 2026)

Close

Fort Hood, Texas. An Army SSG hired MJA while he was under investigation for allegations of sexual harassment and inappropriate conduct at work. MJA worked diligently to protect the soldier during the ongoing investigation and assisted him in collecting the information to fight the allegations. When charges were forwarded to an Administrative Separation Board, MJA, working with the military counsel, defended the SSG at his hearing by tracking down and calling many witnesses who were able to establish the credibility of the SSG in the face of these allegations. MJA also attacked the inaccuracy and inconsistency of the 15-6 which the commander relied in making the wrong decision to substantiate the matter in the first place. MJA’s investigation and demand for discovery before the board allowed the SSG to show his command acted without seeing the full context of the situation surrounding the false SHARP complaint. The board returned a finding of NO basis on all charges and the recommended the SSG be given an immediate rehabilitative transfer so he can resume his career. (February 2026)

Close

Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune, North Carolina. A Lance Corporal (E-3) in the United States Marine Corps was investigated for 8 months by the Marine Corps Criminal Investigation Division (CID) as well as their command for false allegations of hazing and assaulting a junior Marine. Military Justice Attorneys worked tirelessly to unpack the legal issues presented and prepare a defense that not only highlighted the Respondent's remarkable integrity, loyalty, and service, but also brought attention to the complainant's complete lack of credibility. After a fully litigated administrative discharge board, the board members found “no basis” for the alleged misconduct and retained the Lance Corporal on active duty. (February 2026) Close

Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, Florida. An active duty First Lieutenant (O-2) in the U.S. Space Force was served with a Notification of Show Cause action following allegations of misconduct and substandard performance of duties. Given the officer's probationary status, the Respondent was not even afforded the due process of a Board of Inquiry whilst recommend for a General discharge characterization. MJA meticulously analyzed the complete record and found substantial errors, both substantive and procedural. MJA immediately petitioned the Separation Authority for relief. MJA was relentless in defending the Respondent officer even after Government representatives attempted to rehabilitate its case. Ultimately, the designee for the Secretary of the Air Force RETAINED the officer. The Respondent will now be able to Honorably fulfill their obligated service and pursue career advancement and enhancement opportunities. (December 2025) Close

Dobbins Air Reserve Base, Marietta, Georgia. A First Sergeant in the United States Marine Corps was accused of defrauding the federal government of nearly $30,000 worth of pay and allowances. Facing nearly 70 federal convictions, jail time, and a punitive discharge from the Marine Corps, the First Sergeant plead guilty to only three charges. At sentencing, he was awarded 89 days of confinement, reduction to Gunnery Sergeant, and four months of forfeitures; however, he was able to Honorably retire from the Marine Corps shortly after trial.

Close

Marine Corps Air Station Beaufort, South Carolina. A Marine Corporal (E-4) was accused at a General Court-Martial of aggravated assault on his 27-day-old son. The Corporal faced nearly a decade of confinement and a dishonorable discharge from the Marine Corps. He was fully acquitted at trial.

Close

Marine Corps Air Station Beaufort, South Carolina. A Marine Corporal (E-4) was accused of assaulting his wife and two-year-old son with a loaded firearm while on base. The Corporal faced nearly twenty years in confinement, dishonorable discharge, and the likelihood of separation from his son. The Corporal was acquitted of all charges and deployed with his unit after trial.

Close

A Marine Staff Sergeant (E-6) accused of defrauding the Federal Government of $14,000 in government travel credit card charges faced nearly a decade in confinement and a punitive discharge. At a contested General Court-Martial, the Staff Sergeant was found not guilty of all charges.

Close

Marine Corps Air Station Beaufort, South Carolina. A Marine Staff Sergeant (E-6) facing 21 separate charges of hazing, maltreatment, and orders violations withdrawn for a Marine Staff Sergeant (E-6). All charges were disposed of by administrative hearing, and the command was prohibited from involuntarily discharging the Marine based on the conduct. The Marine received an Honorable discharge.

Close

A Lance Corporal (E-3) in the United States Marine Corps faced confinement for life on charges of espionage, stealing government property, and use of a controlled substance. MJA successfully negotiated a plea agreement dismissing the charges of espionage and theft of government property. The Marine avoided a life sentence and was administratively discharged from the service.

Close

A Marine Gunnery Sergeant (E-7) received no punishment after facing several decades of brig time and a punitive discharge for writing $16,000 in bad checks. The Gunnery Sergeant later retired with an Honorable discharge.

Close

Marine Corps Recruit Depot Parris Island, South Carolina. A Marine Drill Instructor was charged with 15 specifications of hazing, maltreatment, and orders violations of nine Recruits. MJA successfully obtained the dismissal of 14 specifications, and the Marine Sergeant received no punishment after conviction of only 1 specification at General Court-Martial.

Close

A U.S. Navy Petty Officer First Class was accused of defrauding the government of several thousands of dollars. At trial, one of the three charges was dismissed by the military judge, and the client was acquitted of another. The Petty Officer was convicted of an orders violation but received no confinement, no punitive discharge, and no forfeitures. Two years later, the Petty Officer was Honorably discharged from the Navy.

Close

U.S. Army Garrison Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri. A Marine Corporal (E-4) was tried at a Special Court-Martial for violating a lawful general order, abusive sexual contact, indecent exposure, and assault consummated by battery. MJA aggressively defended the Marine at trial resulting in his acquittal of all charges and specifications except for the orders violations. MJA later convinced the Commanding Officer to disapprove the adjudged sentence during clemency. The client was Honorably discharged from the Marine Corps.

Close

U.S. Army Garrison Vicenza (Caserma Ederle), Italy. MJA filed a motion to exclude all evidence obtained from a client’s iPhone due to an unlawful search by law enforcement. The Military Judge found that CID exceeded the scope of their search authorization and did not obtain the accused’s consent to search his phone. Accordingly, the Court granted the Defense Motion to Suppress, thereby preventing the Government from introducing evidence obtained from the client’s iPhone.

Close

Marine Corps Recruit Depot Parris Island, South Carolina. A Marine Corporal (E-4) was placed in pretrial confinement for allegations of murder, manslaughter, wrongfully discharging a firearm, and violating a lawful general order. At arraignment, MJA filed a motion to have their client released from confinement based on defects in the initial review hearing. The Military Judge found that the Initial Review Officer had abused his discretion by keeping the Marine in pretrial confinement and ordered the Corporal’s immediate release. The Marine was later awarded administrative confinement credit for the abuse.

Close

Joint Base Charleston, South Carolina. A Senior Airman (E-4) accused of negligent homicide and unlawful drug use/possession faced years of confinement and a punitive discharge. After being retained, MJA successfully negotiated an agreement to withdraw and dismiss the charges of negligent homicide and drug possession, allowing the client to plead guilty to only a single charge of unlawful drug use. During sentencing, MJA persuaded the Court to award the Senior Airman confinement of only 2 months, reduction of one pay grade, and a letter of reprimand. The Senior Airman was not punitively discharged and is eligible to finish his enlistment.

Close

Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton, California. A Marine Lance Corporal (E-3) accused of assault, orders violations, and false official statements was placed in pretrial confinement. MJA was retained to represent the Marine at his confinement review hearing. The Initial Review Officer, after hearing from a CID Agent and a command representative arguing to keep the Marine in the brig, found continued further pretrial confinement was not appropriate under the circumstances. MJA collected statements from key witnesses prior to the hearing to help the Review Officer find in favor of releasing our client.

Close

Fort Jackson, South Carolina. An Army Drill Sergeant was removed from his duties and charged at Special Court-Martial for allegedly assaulting and maltreating a Trainee, among other charges. MJA successfully got the charges dismissed from court-martial in favor of nonjudicial punishment, avoiding any possibility of a criminal conviction, confinement, or punitive discharge. MJA then represented the Drill Sergeant at Article 15 proceedings where he was found not guilty of assault and maltreatment. The Soldier’s suspension and removal from Drill Sergeant duties was withdrawn and his special duty pay reinstated with back pay. The Soldier may once again wear his Drill Sergeant Identification Badge and can now continue his military career.

Close

Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton, California. A Marine Lance Corporal (E-3) accused of domestic violence and other charges was confined in the Navy brig for the alleged misconduct. The command brought charges to an Article 32 hearing with recommendations for a General Court-Martial. Military Justice Attorneys worked with the family to get statements from all the parties urging the command to hold the Marine accountable in other ways. Summary Court-Martial (which is not a criminal conviction) was approved by the commander and MJA successfully fought for the Marine’s release from confinement. The Marine later received a fully honorable discharge.

Close

Naval Base Coronado, California. A Navy Senior Chief (E-8) was investigated for more than two years by NCIS alleging numerous UCMJ violations. Military Justice Attorneys represented the Senior Chief at his Article 32 hearing, securing a recommendation from the Preliminary Hearing Officer encouraging administrative action. Navy Command ignored the recommendation and referred the case to a General Court-Martial. MJA successfully negotiated for the Senior Chief to accept administrative punishment with no loss of rank and for him to be able to retire.

Close

Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point, North Carolina. A Marine Corporal (E-4) accused of violating Article 134, UCMJ, was placed in pretrial confinement. MJA was retained to represent the Marine at his confinement review hearing. After hearing arguments from MJA, the Initial Review Officer found that continued pretrial confinement was not appropriate under the circumstances and released our client from the brig. The Marine can now prepare for his court-martial.

Close

Camp Pendleton, California. A Marine Lance Corporal (E-3) was charged with violating Article 128 and related domestic violence charges. The command initially placed the Marine on pretrial restriction but later decided to place him in the brig pending trial. MJA met with the Marine’s family, interviewed the alleged victim and gathered evidence on behalf of the Marine. MJA used this evidence to secure the Marine’s release from confinement and convince the command to accept an administrative discharge in lieu of trial. The Marine and his family are thrilled that MJA helped him avoid a felony conviction for domestic violence.

Close

Camp Pendleton, California. A Marine Sergeant (E-5) was notified of nonjudicial punishment for allegedly violating the PAC Order on numerous occasions and in a variety of ways. After meeting with counsel from MJA, the Sergeant refused NJP and demanded trial by court-martial. MJA interviewed numerous witnesses, met with lawyers for the command, and submitted written matters and statements on behalf of the Sergeant demonstrating his innocence. After Marine prosecutors filed charges in the case, MJA successfully convinced the command to withdraw and dismiss the charges against the Sergeant.

Close

Camp Pendleton, California. A Corporal (E-4) was charged with hazing and several other violations of the PAC Order. MJA was hired after the Corporal was confined in the brig pending a General Court-Martial. MJA worked with detailed counsel to develop information challenging the most serious allegations being brought against the Corporal. MJA successfully negotiated a summary court-martial resolution, allowing the Corporal to accept responsibility for one minor offense while avoiding a federal criminal conviction. The Marine was released from the brig and discharged under honorable conditions.

Close

San Diego, California. A Petty Officer charged with multiple violations of the UCMJ sought help from MJA after being confined for more than three months pending charges and a court-martial. MJA contacted a senior Navy Mental Health expert involved with the Petty Officer’s case and convinced the expert to provide support for our client’s early release. MJA and the DSO attorney detailed to the case worked together to convince the commander to handle the case administratively and not take the Petty Officer to court-martial. The Petty Officer was released from the brig and received a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge immediately upon his release.

Close

Camp Pendleton, California. A Marine Sergeant (E-5) hired MJA after the Article 32 hearing in his case resulted in charges being filed at a general court-martial. Working with MJA, the detailed counsel and the Sergeant filed several motions challenging the Article 32, the jurisdiction in the case, and several other matters raised by the evidence. Rather than fight the motions in court, the government elected to withdraw and dismiss all charges against the Sergeant.

Close

Naval Clemency and Parole Board (NC&PB). A United States Marine was convicted at general court-martial of violating Articles 92, 114, and 119, UCMJ, and sentenced to 69 months of confinement. While serving confinement, the Marine petitioned for and was denied parole. The Marine retained MJA to fight for his release. MJA prepared and submitted to the NC&PB an extensive petition showing that the Marine met the criteria for parole and had received a disparately severe sentence. MJA also appeared telephonically at the board hearing to advocate on behalf of the Marine. After reviewing all the evidence, the NC&PB agreed and approved the Marine’s request for parole.

Close

Goose Creek, South Carolina. A Seaman (E-3) in the United States Navy was placed in pretrial confinement for alleged violations of drug abuse, absence without leave, breaking restriction, and desertion after being gone from his unit for 93 days. MJA represented the Sailor at his initial review hearing to determine whether continued confinement was necessary. MJA argued that confinement was not necessary to ensure good order and discipline or prevent future misconduct and was not in the Sailor’s best interest. The Initial Review Officer agreed and released the Sailor from the brig.

Close

Camp Humphreys, South Korea. An Army Staff Sergeant (E-6) accused of multiple serious violations of the UCMJ hired MJA after being placed on legal hold and having his retirement upheld pending investigation and possible court-martial. After many months of investigation, preferral and referral of charges to a General Court-Martial, MJA successfully negotiated an agreement allowing the Staff Sergeant to take responsibility for minor offenses in exchange for his retirement. MJA fought depositions the government sought to take at stateside bases and filed and fought other motions which ultimately led the government to accept the terms of the negotiated agreement more favorable to the Staff Sergeant.

Close

Naval Station Mayport, Florida. A First Class Petty Officer was charged with assault consummated by battery and disorderly conduct. After refusing to take a “deal” which would result in his automatic discharge from the Navy, the Sailor retained MJA to defend him at special court-martial where he faced the possibility of a bad conduct discharge, confinement, reduction in rank, and forfeiture of pay, if convicted. MJA and the detailed military attorney worked together to convince the commander to handle the case administratively and not take the Petty Officer to court-martial, resulting in the withdrawal and dismissal of all criminal charges.

Close

Camp Pendleton, California. After twice receiving nonjudicial punishment for drug abuse, a Private (E-1) in the U.S. Marine Corps was placed in pretrial confinement for alleged violations of Article 92 (disobeying an order), Article 107 (false official statement), and Article 109 (destruction of property). MJA was retained to represent the Marine at his initial review officer (IRO) hearing. At the hearing, MJA admitted evidence showing that the Marine did not destroy property or make a false statement, and that the alleged order violation did not require confinement. The IRO agreed and granted the Marine his freedom, releasing him from the brig.

Close

Fort Stewart, Georgia. A Staff Sergeant (E-6) in the United States Army was charged at special court-martial with larceny and solicitation to commit larceny of government property in violation of Articles 82 and 121, UCMJ. After refusing to take a “deal” offered by the government, the SSG hired MJA to defend him at trial where he faced the possibility of confinement, a punitive discharge, and the loss of all medical benefits, if convicted. MJA worked closely with military counsel to expose weaknesses in the government’s case and demonstrated that the charges were the product of false assumptions and a defective investigation. The jury found the Soldier NOT GUILTY on all charges.

Close

Fort Johnson, Louisiana. An Army Specialist (E-4), accused of multiple counts of sexual assault and after spending almost a year in pretrial confinement, hired MJA to get him out of confinement and defend him at a general court-martial. MJA successfully contested the basis for his pretrial confinement and secured his release back to the command. MJA also successfully forced the government to produce five experts ranging from DNA to toxicology to other fields of medical and technical expertise.

Close

Camp Pendleton, California. MJA defended a Marine Sergeant (E-5) on active duty accused of several violations of the UCMJ, the worst of which included allegations of BAH fraud of more than $75,000. Almost three years ago, MJA, working with detailed military counsel, aggressively fought the initial charges brought against the Sergeant at a General Court-Martial (GCM) and successfully had all charges dismissed from trial. MJA continued to work with the Marine after military counsel were dismissed. After two more years of representation since the GCM, the Sergeant is leaving active duty on her terms after repaying the amount properly owed to the government.

Close

Air Force SrA Charges Withdrawn and Dismissed

Lackland AFB, Texas. An Air Force SrA (E-4) hired MJA after being wrongfully accused of several violations of Article 120. The SrA hired MJA at the outset of the investigation which allowed MJA to protect the servicemember from interrogation by local law enforcement officers in San Antonio and also prevented him from being interrogated by AFOSI. After waiting more than a full year to bring formal charges against the SrA, the command forced the matter to an Article 32 hearing where MJA and the detailed counsel showed evidence to convince the Preliminary Hearing Officer that NO probable cause existed for the most serious charges being alleged. The Convening Authority ignored the lack of probable cause and referred the charges to a General Court-Martial. MJA litigated several motions before the military judge who ultimately agreed with the defense and dismissed all charges in the case. With the help of MJA and the detailed military counsel, the SrA PCS’d to his new duty station shortly after the charges were dismissed. (March 2024)

Close

Army SSG has Case Withdrawn and Charges Dismissed

Fort Campbell, Kentucky. An Army SSG (E-6) hired MJA while he was under investigation for allegations of fraud and larceny of government funds. MJA worked diligently to protect the soldier during the ongoing investigation and assisted him in collecting the information necessary to push back on the allegations. When charges were formally filed in the soldier’s case, MJA, working with the military counsel, continued to fight the charges and convinced the lead prosecutor to look at the case with fresh eyes. After a thorough review of the situation, MJA’s communication with the Army prosecutors resulted in charges being withdrawn and resolved administratively. In July, the SSG was notified all charges and specifications against him were withdrawn and dismissed from the Court-Martial and he would be allowed to leave the Army on his own terms. (July 2024)

Close

AWOL Army Private Avoids Court-Martial; Authorized Administrative Discharge for Health/Medical Reasons (Not Misconduct)
Fort Moore, Georgia. A Private in the U.S. Army battling serious health/medical concerns was unsympathetically threatened with their uniformed leadership with a warrant for their arrest and return to military custody awaiting court-martial. MJA immediately intervened to ensure institutional and command accountability to the extent each was derelict in prioritizing troop welfare. MJA worked closely with the client and close allies to respond to allegations of misconduct. More importantly, MJA worked with the client to secure health/medical care. As a direct result of the firm's zealous representation, no warrant was issued and the junior enlisted Soldier was administratively separated for medical reasons, not misconduct. The Soldier received an UNCHARACTERIZED discharge, thereby protecting their reputation and future opportunities. (September 2024) Close

Navy First Class Wins Freedom

Norfolk, Virginia. A Navy MM1 (E-6) hired MJA after being wrongfully accused of violating Article 120 and several other violations of the UCMJ. MJA worked closely with detailed counsel to negotiate terms of a pretrial agreement with the government which allowed the petty officer to take responsibility for far less serious charges and ensuring the MM1 would not suffer forfeitures or be confined in the brig or face any post-trial concerns of sex offender registration after leaving the Navy. (November 2024)

Close

Another Marine LCpl Cleared of All Charges

Camp Pendleton, California. MJA successfully defended a Marine LCpl (E-3) accused of assault and domestic violence. The Marine contacted MJA after being issued a Military Protective Order preventing him from having any contact with his spouse. MJA contacted the command and the investigator handling the matter to ensure the Marine’s voice was being heard in the situation. MJA also conducted interviews and obtained statements and other evidence to ensure the command had a better sight picture on the events leading to the allegations against the LCpl. MJA successfully got the charges dismissed and the Marine will EAS in January 2025 with no punishment or administrative measures being taken against him as a result of these allegations. (December 2024)

Close

Quantico, Virginia. A Marine Staff Sergeant (E-6) was charged at general court-martial with allegations of domestic violence, assault with a dangerous weapon, child endangerment, false swearing, extramarital sexual conduct, obstruction of justice, and solicitation. The Staff Sergeant accepted responsibility for adultery but pleaded not guilty to all other charges. MJA mounted a vigorous defense strategy at trial, demonstrating that the Staff Sergeant acted lawfully to protect himself during the alleged assault and that the other allegations against him were legally and factually insufficient. After deliberation, the jury found the Staff Sergeant NOT GUILTY on all charges, and the Staff Sergeant received "no punishment" for the single adultery offense, allowing him to honorably complete his military service. (July 2025) Close

United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals (ACCA). A Soldier was convicted of two specifications of sexual assault and one specification of abusive sexual contact in violation of Article 120, UCMJ. The military judge sentenced the accused to a dishonorable discharge and confinement for 18 months. The Soldier appealed his conviction to the Army Court of Criminal Appeals, raising five assignments of error. On appeal, ACCA determined that the military judge abused his discretion by preventing an expert from testifying on behalf of the defense, and that the error resulted in prejudice to the Soldier. As a result, the Court set aside the findings of guilty and the sentence. (September 2025)

Close

JBLM Fort Lewis, Washington. MJA successfully defended an Army Staff Sergeant (SSG) who, while working as a recruiter, was falsely accused of sexually assaulting an applicant seeking entry into the Army. Working closely with the detailed military counsel, MJA helped the SSG fight back against the accusations. MJA aggressively cross-examined the complaining witness, coordinated other witness testimony from experts and fellow recruiters, and argued effectively on behalf of the SSG at the Court-Martial resulting in a finding of not guilty on all charges nd specifications. The SSG is now pursuing a rehabilitative transfer after 18 months of being flagged due to the pending charges. (December 2025)

Close

Kaiserslautern, Germany. An Army Sergeant First Class (SFC) hired MJA being charged with three separate violations of Article 120. MJA and the detailed military defense counsel worked tirelessly to contact witnesses in four countries, hire the best expert consultants, and force the Government to respond requests for depositions, additional discovery, and expert assistance. By litigating matters large and small, MJA kept the government off balance and unprepared to try the case against our client. One month before trial was scheduled to commence, the Convening Authority withdrew all charges and specifications from the General Court-Martial. By forcing this action, MJA helped the SFC resolve everything administratively avoiding a conviction, jail time, and sex offender registration. (March 2026)

Close

Parris Island, South Carolina. A Marine Sergeant (Sgt) hired MJA after being wrongfully accused of violating several articles of the UCMJ while pushing recruits on the drill field. MJA advised the Sgt to refuse the Article 15 being offered by her CO because it was obvious a decision had already been made to find her guilty of all the wild accusations being made against her. MJA, along with detailed military counsel, aggressively pushed back against the government’s arguments and caused the government to withdraw and dismiss all charges in November 2025 when they could not produce the necessary witnesses for trial. MJA continued to fight for the Sgt when the command decided to bring charges against her again at a second Court-Martial. After successfully challenging numerous recruits and a fellow Drill Instructors under cross-examination, the members found the Sgt not guilty of all of the serious offenses and the Military Judge awarded no punishment to the Sgt. By fighting the accusations initially charged at the NJP, MJA helped the Sgt save her rank, but more importantly, allowed her to have a voice in the process. (March 2026)

Close

Kings Bay, GA. Navy Master-at-Arms found not guilty of allegedly unholstering firearm and pointing it at another Sailor.

Close

Marine Corps Recruit Depot Parris Island, South Carolina. A Marine Staff Sergeant (E-6) was found not guilty by the members of a General Court-Martial on all charges of hazing, blood striping, pinning, and condoning such behavior of several NCOs while deployed. The Marine was promoted to Gunnery Sergeant (E-7) the following month and allowed to re-enlist.

Close

Petition for Removal from Federal Investigative "Subject Titling" - GRANTED
MCAS Beaufort, South Carolina. A former Non-Commissioned Officer (NCO) in the U.S. Marine Corps was voluntarily released from active duty, seemingly in good standing. However, criminal background checks showed otherwise, as the former NCO was investigated by the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) for felony allegations of sexual assault while on active duty. MJA partnered with the client to clear their good name and reputation. Even post-service, the client's name populated the subject block of the related NCIS investigation that appeared on criminal background checks and ultimately operated to prevent the client from securing civilian employment in law enforcement. MJA counsel, on behalf of the client, engaged in a holistic approach by first submitting a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)/Privacy Act (PA) request for the entire NCIS investigation. MJA also obtained the client's entire Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). MJA skillfully and accurately articulated for the appellate/review authority via a robust written petition for removal how no probable cause existed at the time of subject titling and/or at present in accordance with applicable federal law and regulations. Key evidence was highlighted that clearly justified the client's request for subject titling removal. The petition was GRANTED. The former NCO no longer needs worry that this federal criminal investigation will prevent them from furthering their career in law enforcement. The client can be proud of their Honorable service in uniform. Close

COVID-19 Vax Refusal; Naval Discharge Review Board Grants Marine NCO Upgrade to Honorable Discharge
Camp Lejeune, North Carolina. A Non-Commissioned Officer (NCO) in the United States Marine Corps was subject to involuntary administrative separation without the benefit of a board hearing. The assigned discharge characterization denied the NCO access to their Post 9/11 G.I. Bill educational benefits among others. The separation was just months shy of the NCO's end of active service oblgation and after the command refused to grant a valid request for medical exemption following the NCO's receipt of the first of two COVID-19 immunizations. MJA partnered with the client to successfully appeal to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB). After carefully considering the actual facts and circumstances as well as the firm's legal analysis and discussion as expertly presented in the appeal, the NDRB -- directed the discharge characterization be upgraded to fully Honorable; removed "misconduct" as a basis for separation; and eliminated the unfavorable reentry code. This extremely favorable outcome will allow the NCO to receive their G.I. Bill and related benefits and to continue a career in the military.

Close

Army Discharge Review Board. An Army Specialist (E-4) was involuntarily separated with a General discharge after receiving Article 15 punishment for a DUI and being Absent Without Leave. The Soldier was later diagnosed with service-connected mental health disorders and appealed his discharge. MJA represented the veteran in front of the Army Discharge Review Board and successfully argued for a discharge upgrade to Honorable.

Close

Board for Correction of Naval Records. A Sailor discharged from the Navy in 1987 for a pattern of misconduct spent over 30 years with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service. After repeatedly being denied VA healthcare treatment because his discharge was not under honorable conditions, the Veteran retained MJA. MJA filed a petition with the Board for Correction of Naval Records arguing that the discharge and characterization of service were improper and inequitable. The Board agreed and awarded the Veteran an honorable discharge.

Close

Army Discharge Review Board. An Army Specialist (E-4) was involuntarily separated with a General discharge after receiving Article 15 punishment for allegedly failing to obey a lawful order and providing alcohol to an underage servicemember. MJA submitted a written petition to the Army Discharge Review Board (DRB) arguing that the servicemember should have received a Chapter Board hearing, and not been separated via notification procedures, because he had more than 6 years of creditable service including his time in the Delayed Entry Program. The DRB found that the Army failed to follow the proper discharge and separation procedures and upgraded the Soldier to a fully Honorable characterization of service.

Close

Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR). A Gunnery Sergeant (E-7) in the United States Marine Corps was awarded Nonjudicial Punishment (NJP) and issued a 6105 Counseling after being arrested for operating a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol. MJA appealed the punishment on the basis that the Commanding Officer who imposed NJP failed to comply with JAGINST 5800.7F. The BCNR determined the NJP and counseling entry were invalid and removed them from the Marine’s OMPF. The BCNR further directed that a fitness report referring to the NJP be redacted to exclude any reference of the punishment.

Close

United States Merchant Marine Academy. A Midshipman at the United States Merchant Marine Academy (USMMA) requested a religious exemption from the COVID-19 vaccine due to his sincerely held religious beliefs. MJA worked closely with the Midshipman to put together a comprehensive request with supporting evidence. Upon reviewing the request, the U.S. Department of Transportation Maritime Administration granted the COVID-19 vaccine exemption, allowing the Midshipman to continue his enrollment at the Academy.

Close

Army Discharge Review Board. An Army Private (E-1) was involuntarily separated with a Other Than Honorable (OTH) discharge after receiving a Summary Court-Martial and Article 15 punishments for allegedly violating Articles 86, 87, 90, and 91, UCMJ. In 2008, the veteran submitted a petition to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) requesting a discharge upgrade but was denied relief. The veteran retained MJA to help with the appeal. MJA submitted extensive evidence to the ADRB showing that the Soldier suffered from debilitating medical issues which adversely impacted his ability to perform his military duties. Based on the evidence presented, the ADRB determined that the Soldier’s discharge was inequitable based on the circumstances surrounding his discharge and his post-service accomplishment and upgraded the Soldier to a General Under Honorable characterization of service.

Close

Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB). A Private (E-1) was involuntarily discharged from the United States Army under Other Than Honorable (OTH) Conditions for Misconduct (Serious Offense) after receiving Article 15 punishment and a summary court-martial conviction for alleged violations of Articles 86, 87, 90, and 91, UCMJ. Due to his characterization of service, the Private was unable critical VA medical treatment related to service connected injuries. The Soldier retained MJA after unsuccessfully petitioning the ADRB for a discharge upgrade on his own and being denied relief. MJA reviewed the Soldier’s military records and submitted extensive evidence and arguments to the ADRB demonstrating that the Soldier did not commit serious misconduct and should not have been discharged with an OTH. The DRB agreed and upgraded the Soldier’s characterization of service to General Under Honorable Conditions, allowing him to reapply for VA medical coverage.

Close

Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR). A Chief Petty Officer in the United States Navy was titled and indexed by the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) during an investigation for a violation of Article 120, UCMJ. Despite substantial and overwhelming evidence showing that the Sailor did not commit the offense, NCIS refused to remove the titling determination. MJA appealed the decision to the BCNR, which determined that credible information did not exist to title the Sailor and that the titling was a “significant injustice.” The BCNR granted the Sailor full relief and recommended that NCIS expunge his name as a titled and indexed subject from the NCIC and DCII criminal history databases.

Close

U.S. Marine Corps Reserve. A Corporal in the United States Marine Corps Reserve was notified of involuntary administrative separation for refusing to take the COVID-19 vaccine. Despite years of honorable service, the Marine was recommended for a general (under honorable conditions) discharge which, if approved, would deny him of important military benefits. MJA submitted compelling written matters in response to the separation explaining why the Marine should not be separated with a general discharge. The command agreed and awarded the Corporal a fully honorable characterization of service upon discharge.

Close

Naval Discharge Review Board. A United States Marine was involuntarily discharged after only five months of service for misconduct and given an RE-4 Code, making him ineligible for reenlistment. MJA appealed the decision to the NDRB, arguing that the separation was legally and factually deficient and warranted a new reason for separation and RE-Code. The NDRB agreed that the alleged misconduct was not a serious offense and that the Marine’s discharge was not fair under the circumstances. The DRB changed the narrative reason for separation from Misconduct (Serious Offense) to Entry Level Performance and Conduct and awarded the Marine an RE-1 Code, making him fully qualified to reenlist.

Close

Army Board for Correction of Military Records. A Private First Class (E-3) in the United States Army was titled and indexed by the Army Criminal Investigation Division (CID) for assault consummated by battery after a domestic incident with her spouse. The Soldier was never taken to court-martial or nonjudicial punishment and was later honorably discharged. Despite these facts, the Soldier remained titled and later learned that she was disqualified from working in the healthcare field due to the titling action. After USACID refused to remove the titling entry, MJA appealed the decision to the ABCMR. The Army Board determined that the Soldier was the victim of domestic physical abuse and should not have been titled. The ABCMR granted the Soldier full relief and recommended that all Department of the Army records concerning the Soldier be corrected by removing her name from the title block of the law enforcement report.

Close

Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB). A Lance Corporal (E-3) in the United States Marine Corps was administratively separated for misconduct (serious offense) for an alleged violation of Article 128b, UCMJ (domestic assault) and given a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge. MJA petitioned the NDRB for a discharge upgrade. MJA presented evidence on appeal showing that the Marine’s spouse was the aggressor and that he only acted in self-defense. The NDRB determined that the Marine had not committed domestic violence and that his discharge was based on hardship and convenience of the government, rather than misconduct. Consequently, the NDRB upgraded the Marine’s characterization of service to fully “Honorable”, changed the narrative reason for separation, and changed the separation code and reentry code to reflect his Honorable service.

Close

Department of the Army Criminal Investigation Division (DACID). A Captain (0-3) in the United States Army was titled and indexed for Resisting Apprehension in violation of Article 87a, UCMJ. The Soldier appealed the decision and provided evidence to DACID that he had not resisted apprehension. After reviewing the evidence and argument presented by MJA, DACID agreed that there was no probable cause to believe that the officer had resisted apprehension and directed that his record be amended to remove his name from the title block for the offense and that any corresponding entry into the Defense Central Index of Investigations (DCII) should be removed.

Close

Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB). A Sergeant (E-5) in the United States Marine Corps was administratively separated for using cocaine, given a Bad Conduct discharge (BCD), and automatically reduced to Lance Corporal (E-3). MJA petitioned the NDRB for a discharge upgrade and related relief. MJA presented evidence on appeal showing that the assignment of a BCD via administrative means was unlawful, that the command unconscionably lost or destroyed records pertaining to his separation, and that the Marine served honorably throughout multiple enlistments to include several combat deployments. Consequently, the NDRB upgraded the Marine’s characterization of service to fully “Honorable”, changed the narrative reason for separation from misconduct to Secretarial Authority, and changed the separation code. The Marine’s rank to Sergeant was also restored.

Close

Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB). A Hospitalman (HN) (E-3) in the United States Navy was administratively discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) characterization of service for condition not a disability. MJA appealed to the NDRB and provided substantial evidence that the Sailor’s substantive and procedural rights were violated during the separation process and that a general discharge was unjust under the circumstances. The NDRB agreed with MJA that the Sailor’s service met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance and upgraded the Sailor’s characterization of service to fully honorable.

Close

Naval Discharge Review Board GRANTS Seaman Petition to Remove Misconduct Basis and Authorizes Reenlistment
Naval Station Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. A junior enlisted member in the United States Navy was terminated for their lawful objection to receiving the Department of Defense and Department of the Navy mandated COVID-19 immunization. The Sailor merely expressed their firmly held religious beliefs, moral convictions, and matters of conscience. Nevertheless, the service unconscionably qualified the refusal as Misconduct - Commission of a Serious Offense and assigned an unfavorable reentry code of "RE-4." MJA submitted an extremely well-researched and thorough petition for relief on behalf of the client to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB). MJA expertly pointed out key areas of concern undermining the Government's actions related to the client's discharge and key evidence supporting the requests to amend the basis for separation to Secretarial Authority and to authorize reenlistment. All requests were GRANTED. The client will now be permitted to continue their Honorable service in the Navy and promote. (March 2024) Close

Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB). A Sergeant (E-5) in the United States Army was administratively separated for misconduct (serious offense) under AR 635-200 and given a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge, separation code JKQ, and reentry code 3 after refusing to take the COVID-19 vaccine. MJA petitioned the ADRB for a discharge upgrade. The Board determined that the Soldier's discharge was inequitable and granted relief. The Board upgraded the Soldier's characterization of service to fully “Honorable”, changed the narrative reason for separation to "Secretarial Authority", changed the separation code to "JFF", and changed reentry code to RE-1 which would allow the Soldier to rejoin the military should he so choose. (July 2024)

Close

Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB). A Private Second Class (E-2) in the United States Army was administratively separated for misconduct (serious offense) under AR 635-200 and given a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge, separation code JKQ, and reentry code 3 after refusing to take the COVID-19 vaccine. MJA petitioned the ADRB for a discharge upgrade. The Board determined that the Soldier's discharge was inequitable based on the 24 February 2023 SECARMY Policy Memo rescinding the COVID-19 vaccine. Accordingly, the Board upgraded the Soldier's characterization of service to fully “Honorable”, changed the narrative reason for separation to "Completion of Required Active Service" with a corresponding separation code of "KBK", and changed reentry code to RE-1 which would allow the Soldier to rejoin the military should he so choose. (July 2024) Close

Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB). In 2010, a Corporal (E-4) in the U.S. Marine Corps was administratively discharged with an Other than Honorable (OTH) characterization of service after receiving two NJPs and multiple counselings for violating Article 86 (AWOL) and 92 (Orders Violation), UCMJ. MJA appealed to the NDRB and provided substantial evidence that the Marine's substantive and procedural rights were violated during the separation process and that an OTH discharge was unjust under the circumstances. The NDRB agreed with MJA that the Marine's service met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance and that MJA submitted substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption of regularity in government affairs. Based on these findings, the Board unanimously determined that an OTH discharge was inequitable and upgraded the Marine to a FULLY HONORABLE characterization of service. (November 2024)

Close

Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB).

A Marine Lance Corporal (E-3) was administratively discharged under Other than Honorable (OTH) conditions after receiving nonjudicial punishment for violating Article 112a (Drug Abuse) and being counseled for insubordinate conduct under Article 91, UCMJ. MJA appealed to the NDRB and argued that the characterization of service was inequitable due to procedural errors and mishandling of evidence that result in an OTH. MJA further argued that the drug use was caused by an in-service medical condition, and that an upgrade was appropriate given the Marine's post-service accomplishments. Based on the evidence submitted, the NDRB determined that the Marine's service record did not merit an enduring OTH and upgraded his discharge to a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service. (December 2024)

Close

Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB). In 2021, a Master-at-Arms Second Class (MA2) in the U.S. Navy was involuntarily separated with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge for commission of a serious offense after filing whistleblower complaints against his leadership. MJA appealed to the NDRB and provided evidence that the Sailor's discharge was the direct result of unlawful retaliation and reprisal following his efforts to report matters of concern within his unit. The NDRB found that the evidence provided demonstrated a "reasonable connection between his protected whistleblower actions and the subsequent adverse actions taken against him," and that the Sailor's service generally met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of Naval personnel. Based on the circumstances presented, the NDRB granted "full relief" to the Sailor and upgraded him to a fully HONORABLE characterization of service. The NDRB also changed his narrative reason to Secretarial Authority, with a corresponding separation code of JFF and reentry code of RE-1. (April 2025) Close

Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB). An Airman First Class (E-3) in the U.S. Air Force was administratively separated for misconduct (serious offense) and given a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge and RE-4 code after refusing to take the COVID-19 vaccine. MJA petitioned the AFDRB for relief. The Board determined that the Airman’s discharge was inequitable and upgraded his characterization of service to fully “Honorable.” The Board further changed the narrative reason for separation to "Secretarial Authority" and changed his reentry code to RE-1, allowing the Airman to rejoin the military should he so choose. (May 2025)

Close

Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB). In 2016, a Senior Airman in the U.S. Air Force was involuntarily separated with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge under AFI 36-3208 for misconduct (drug abuse) after admitting to using marijuana on two occasions early in his career. MJA petitioned the AFDRB requesting a discharge upgrade on behalf of the Airman and provided evidence that the Airman's discharge and characterization of service were unjust and disproportionate to the offenses. When relief was denied, MJA appealed to the AFBCMR while simultaneously applying for reconsideration by the AFDRB after they failed to apply liberal consideration. After a hard-fought battle, the AFDRB reversed its original decision and upgraded the Senior Airman to a fully HONORABLE characterization of service. The AFDRB also changed his narrative reason to Secretarial Authority and reentry code to 3K. (July 2025)

Close

Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR). A Senior Airman (E-4) in the U.S. Air Force was administratively separated for misconduct (drug abuse) with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge after testing positive for a prescription medication that belonged to a friend. After the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied a discharge upgrade request, MJA petitioned the AFBCMR for relief. MJA submitted evidence showing that the Air Force had failed to properly investigated the alleged drug use, failed to refer the case to the Integrated Disability Evaluation System, and misapplied the retention criteria. Upon review, the AFBCMR found that the applicant had presented evidence sufficient to demonstrate an injustice and upgraded the characterization of service to fully “Honorable." The Board also changed the narrative reason for separation to "Secretarial Authority." (August 2025) Close

Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB). 20-years after receiving a general court-martial conviction for minor offenses, an Air Force Officer receives a fully honorable discharge. In 2007, a Captain in the U.S. Air Force was involuntarily separated with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge under AFI 36-3207 (misconduct) following a general court-martial conviction that did not result in a punitive discharge. MJA petitioned the AFDRB requesting a discharge upgrade on behalf of the officer and provided evidence that the discharge and characterization of service were unjust. After an initial denial, MJA submitted for reconsideration pursuant to an Air Force-wide class action lawsuit. Upon review, the AFDRB reversed its original decision and upgraded the Captain to a fully HONORABLE characterization of service. The AFDRB also changed the narrative reason to Secretarial Authority and reentry code to 3K. Congratulations to this well-deserving client! (August 2025) Close

Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR). A Soldier in the United States Army was titled and indexed for suspected violations of Articles 128b, 128, and 92, UCMJ. The Soldier appealed the decision the CID, providing evidence that there was not probable cause to support the titling. After CID denied the expungement request, MJA appealed the decision to the ABCMR. The ABCMR found that while probable cause existed when the Soldier was initially titled, probable cause no longer exists because the allegations had been withdrawn and a Commander's Report indicated there was no probable cause after interviewing the alleged victim. Accordingly, the Board recommended that all Department of the Army records of the Soldier be corrected to show removal of the Soldier's name as the subject from the Defense Central Index of Investigations (DCII) and any other record maintained in connection with such a report or index. (September 2025)

Close

Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB). An Corporal (E-4) in the U.S. Marine Corps Reserve was administratively separated for "Unsatisfactory Performance / Participation in the Ready Reserve" and given the lowest administrative characterization of service (Other than Honorable) and an RE-4 code after refusing to take the COVID-19 vaccine. MJA petitioned the NDRB for relief. After representing our client at a fully litigated hearing, the Board determined that the Marine’s discharge was improper and inequitable and upgraded his characterization of service to fully “Honorable.” The Board further changed the narrative reason for separation to "Secretarial Authority" and changed his reentry code to RE-1, allowing the Marine to rejoin the military should he so choose. (September 2025) Close

Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB). A Seaman (E-3) in the United States Navy was administratively discharged with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service after two years on active duty. The basis for separation was fraudulent entry after the Sailor allegedly failed to disclose disqualifying medical conditions during the enlistment process. MJA petitioned the NDRB for relief and represented the Sailor during an "in-person" hearing. Upon review, the NDRB found that the applicant had presented evidence sufficient to demonstrate an injustice and upgraded the characterization of service to fully “Honorable." The Board also changed the narrative reason for separation from "Fraudulent Entry" to "Condition, Not a Disability." (January 2026)

Close

Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB). A Captain (O-3) in the U.S. Army was administratively discharged with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service after 13 years of honest and faithful service. The basis for separation was unacceptable conduct after the Soldier allegedly engaged in sexual assault and harassment. MJA petitioned the ADRB for relief with a expertly drafted presentation of actual facts, legal authorities, and analysis. Upon review, the ADRB found that the applicant had presented evidence sufficient to refute the sexual assault claims and to demonstrate an injustice, and the Board upgraded the characterization of service to fully “Honorable." The Board also changed the narrative reason for separation. (January 2026) Close

Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR). A Master Sergeant in the United States Army sought expungement after being improperly titled and indexed for alleged domestic assault, assault consummated by battery upon a child, and failure to obey a lawful order, in violation of Articles 128/128b and 92, UCMJ, respectively, as well as for an alleged violation of State criminal law. After getting the Soldier's DNA expunged, MJA submitted substantial evidence to Headquarters, Army Criminal Investigation Division (CID) showing that there was not probable cause to title the Soldier for the alleged offenses. CID improperly denied relief. MJA appealed to ABCMR. Upon reviewing the evidence and arguments presented by MJA, ABCMR agreed that relief was warranted and directed the immediate expungement of ALL titling entries in the National Crime Information Center (NCIC), Defense Central Index of Investigations (DCII) and Interstate Identification Index (III). Congratulations to this well-deserving client! (February 2026) Close

Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR). A retired Sergeant First Class (E-7) in the United States Army sought expungement after being improperly titled and indexed for alleged abusive sexual contact and simple assault. After receiving only partial relief from the Army Criminal Investigation Division (CID) to remove the record, the Soldier hired MJA to fight for full relief. MJA appealed to the ABCMR and provided substantial written matters and evidence showing that there was not probable cause to title the Soldier for the alleged offenses. Upon reviewing the evidence and arguments presented by MJA, the ABCMR agreed that "full relief" was warranted and directed the expungement of ALL titling entries in the Defense Central Index of Investigations (DCII) system. Congratulations to this well-deserving client! (March 2026)

Close

NO BASIS Determined by Administrative Separation Board Considering Positive Urinalysis for "Delta 8"
Navy Reserve Center Greenville, South Carolina. A Non-Commissioned Officer (NCO) in the United States Navy Reserve was threatened with an involuntary administrative separation and Other than Honorable (OTH) characterization of service upon discharge. MJA aggressively challenged the purported findings of the command investigation into alleged wrongful use of a noncontrolled substance -- Delta-8 Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC 8), in violation of Article 92, UCMJ. MJA worked closely with the client to expertly respond to the allegation, which stemmed from the client's three positive urinalyses. This was a clear case of innocent, or unknowing, ingestion of a hemp-derived substance, albeit lawfully sold and consumed across the United States and commonly found in vapes, edibles, and lotions. MJA quickly engaged the Sailor's leadership through the initiation of requests for discovery. MJA counsel represented the client at the board hearing in accordance with The Naval Military Personnel Manual. Given the accurate and expertly drafted rebuttal matters and evidence -- including witness testimony -- presented to the Board by MJA for consideration, the Board had no choice but to find that the Government's evidence was insufficient to establish any basis for separation. The Board denied the Government counsel's request for substantiation and separation of the client. The client will now be permitted to continue their Honorable service in the Navy Reserve and promote. Close

NO BASIS Determined by Administrative Separation Board Considering Positive Urinalysis for "Delta 9"
MCAS Beaufort, South Carolina. A junior enlisted member in the U.S. Marine Corps was threatened with nonjudicial punishment (NJP) and an involuntary administrative separation, thereby denying them the opportunity for a board hearing and to meaningfully challenge a General characterization of service upon discharge. MJA aggressively challenged the purported findings of the Marine Corps' Criminal Investigation Division (CID) investigation into alleged wrongful use of a controlled substance -- Delta-9 Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC 9), in violation of Article 112a, UCMJ. MJA worked closely with the client to expertly respond to the allegation, which stemmed from the client's positive urinalysis. MJA quickly engaged the Marine's leadership through the submission of written rebuttal matters, exercising proper tone and highlighting key evidence in defense in support of innocent (i.e., unknowing) ingestion of a non-controlled, hemp-derived substance lawfully sold and commonly found in vapes, edibles, and lotions. In light of the written matters, the command elected to not prefer and refer charges to court-martial. Rather, the command gave the Marine the opportunity for an administrative separation board hearing. MJA counsel represented the client at the board hearing in accordance with the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual. The Government unwisely added an unrelated (and newer) allegation of Government Travel Charge Card (GTCC) misuse/abuse. Nevertheless, given the rebuttal matters and evidence -- including witness testimony -- presented to the Board by MJA for consideration, the Board had no choice but to find that the Government's evidence was insufficient to establish any basis. The Board denied the Government counsel's request for substantiation and separation of the client with an Other than Honorable (OTH) characterization of service. The client will now be permitted to continue their Honorable service in the Marine Corps and promote. Close

Soldier Retains Rank and Pay Despite Positive Urinalysis for "Delta 8"

Fort Stewart, Georgia. A Specialist in the United States Army was threatened with potentially career-ending consequences following an Army commander's investigation into alleged wrongful use of a prohibited substance -- Delta-8 Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC 8), in violation of Article 92, UCMJ. MJA worked closely with the client to expertly respond to the allegation, which stemmed from the client's positive urinalysis. MJA engaged the Soldier's leadership through the submission of written rebuttal matters, exercising proper tone and highlighting key evidence in defense in support of innocent ingestion. The command elected not to prefer and refer charges to court-martial. MJA counsel represented the client as their spokesperson at nonjudicial punishment (NJP) in accordance with the Manual for Courts-Martial, UCMJ, and Army Regulations (AR) 27-10 and 15-6. In light of the rebuttal matters submitted to the Commander for consideration, the Commander directed that all rank reduction and forfeitures be suspended and that the Soldier be recommended for retention. Involuntary administrative separation was not initiated. The client will now be permitted to continue their Honorable service in the Army and promote.

Close

Naval Health Clinic New England, Newport, Rhode Island. A Chief Petty Officer (E-7), who failed a urinalysis, was retained in the Navy.

Close

Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point, North Carolina. A Hospitalman (E-3) tested positive for hydrocodone on a urinalysis and was notified of nonjudicial punishment. MJA submitted proof to the command that the substance had been unknowingly ingested by the Sailor. Based on this evidence, the Commanding Officer determined that the positive urinalysis was not due to wrongful use, allowing the Sailor to remain on active duty.

Close

Virginia. An Army applicant was disqualified from enlisting after his MEPS urinalysis tested positive for drugs. MJA worked tirelessly with MEPs and the applicant’s recruiting command to prove that the urinalysis result was a false-positive which did not disqualify the applicant from retesting. The applicant was allowed to retest, which he passed, and later shipped to basic training where he served with distinction.

Close

Naval Station Norfolk, Virginia. A Petty Officer Third Class (E-4) approaching his End of Active Obligated Service tested positive for cocaine. The Sailor avoided trial by court-martial and received an Honorable discharge after reaching his end of enlistment.

Close

Camp Lejeune, North Carolina. A Lance Corporal (E-3) serving his first enlistment tested positive for cocaine following an all-hands urinalysis. The Marine was notified of involuntary administrative separation and convinced by his command to sign a board waiver, allowing him to receive an Other than Honorable (OTH) characterization of service. MJA was retained days before the Marine’s separation. MJA immediately withdrew the board waiver and requested an extension of time to submit matters in rebuttal. MJA then provided evidence to show that the Marine had not used cocaine and that the urinalysis result was in error. The Marine was retained on active duty and allowed to continue his military service. Close

Virginia Beach, Virginia. A Petty Officer Third Class (E-4) tested positive for THC following a random urinalysis. The Sailor was notified of NJP where, if convicted, he faced the possibility of reduction in rank, restriction, and administrative separation from the Navy. The Sailor retained MJA the night before his nonjudicial punishment proceeding. After obtaining an extension, MJA provided evidence to the command showing that the Sailor had innocently ingested THC infused candy. This was confirmed by multiple witnesses and the Sailor’s exemplary military character. Based on this evidence, the Commanding Officer found the Sailor not guilty at NJP. He determined that the positive urinalysis was not a drug abuse incident requiring mandatory separation processing. With his name cleared, the Sailor will be allowed to continue his career in the Navy.

Close

Norfolk, Virginia. A Petty Officer First Class (E-6) tested positive for cocaine twice following two all-hands urinalyses. The Sailor, who had served in the Navy for almost 18 years, was notified of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) and was facing potential involuntary administrative separation from the Navy. MJA conducted an investigation to uncover evidence favorable to our case and to show that the Sailor innocently ingested cocaine by drinking coca tea from Peru. Scientific studies conclusively link consumption of coca tea with positive drug tests for cocaine. Based on the evidence submitted by MJA, the Sailor was found not guilty at NJP and will remain on active duty to finish his career.

Close

Camp Lejeune, North Carolina. A Marine Corporal (E-4) was accused of multiple violations of the UCMJ to include possession of narcotics and steroids in violation of Articles 112a and 92, UCMJ. The Corporal wanted to stay in the Marine Corps and retained MJA to help preserve his rights throughout the process. MJA worked with the Corporal to gather witness statements to show he never used drugs or possessed illegal drugs with the intent to use them. As a result of MJA’s efforts, the Corporal was found not guilty of the allegations at NJP and will not be administratively separated from the Marine Corps. The Corporal is happy for the opportunity to finish his enlistment.

Close

Camp Pendleton, California. A Hospital Corpsman Second Class (E-5) was notified of nonjudicial punishment for allegedly violating Article 112a after testing positive for amphetamines. The Corpsman refused NJP and demanded trial by court-martial, explaining to his command that he had a lawful prescription for Adderall. MJA submitted extensive written matters on behalf of the Sailor demonstrating his innocence. The command, ignoring the evidence, sent a request for legal services requesting court-martial charges. MJA immediately worked with the Government prosecutor to not bring criminal charges and to refer the case to an administrative separation hearing. MJA represented the Corpsman at the board hearing and proved that the Sailor did not wrongfully use a controlled substance. The board voted unanimously to find NO BASIS for the alleged drug abuse. The Corpsman was retained on active duty and is excited to continue his military career.

Close

Fort Hood, Texas. An Army Staff Sergeant (E-6) was arrested near the Mexican border and charged with felony possession of narcotics in Texas courts. MJA conducted numerous interviews and performed an extensive investigation over approximately 15 months while the Soldier was pending charges and sentencing in Texas courts for alleged crimes carrying up to 20 years, if convicted. MJA worked with the State prosecutor to allow the Soldier’s combat experience and PTSD to be considered by the court. MJA represented the Soldier at numerous hearings before the court in South Texas and before a Chapter Board at Fort Hood. The Soldier received Shock Probation for the offenses in Texas courts and is working closely with the VA to receive treatment and care for his service-related injuries.

Close

Fort Hood, Texas. An Army Sergeant (E-5) was notified of Article 15 for allegedly violating Article 112a of the UCMJ. After meeting with counsel from MJA, the Sergeant refused Article 15 and demanded trial by court-martial. The command referred the case to a Special Court-Martial and added charges of violating the Army Regulation which prohibits use of hemp products. Counsel for MJA worked with TDS counsel and a forensic toxicologist to successfully defend the Sergeant at court-martial where he was fully acquitted of all charges and specifications.

Close

Camp Lejeune, North Carolina. A Sergeant in the United States Marine Corps was placed on pretrial restriction after refusing nonjudicial punishment for a positive urinalysis, preventing the Marine from exercising basic liberties. MJA immediately requested that the Commander terminate the pretrial restriction, arguing that it was an abuse of discretion and constituted unlawful pretrial punishment in violation of Article 13, UCMJ. Upon receipt of MJA’s demand, the Commanding Officer granted the request and released the Marine from the terms of restriction, allowing him to take leave and see loved one off base.

Close

Fort Stewart, Georgia. An Army Staff Sergeant (E-6) was offered Article 15 after a failed urinalysis related to fentanyl. The SSG refused Article 15 and retained MJA to defend him at court-martial. MJA immediately began to develop the defense of accidental ingestion and discovered exculpatory evidence proving that the SSG did not commit drug abuse. MJA used the exculpatory evidence to convince the Government prosecutors and commanding officer to dismiss and withdraw the charge alleging a violation of Article 112a. UCMJ. Five weeks after being served a charge sheet, the charge was withdrawn and dismissed and the command removed the Soldier’s administrative flags.

Close

Quantico, Virginia. A Gunnery Sergeant (E-7) in the United States Marine Corps was notified of administrative separation after testing positive on a urinalysis. MJA was retained to defend the Marine. At the board hearing, MJA and detailed defense counsel admitted documentary evidence and testimony that the positive urinalysis was the result of an innocent ingestion. The Board found “NO BASIS” for the alleged drug abuse and retained the Marine on active duty.

Close

Charleston, South Carolina. A junior enlisted Sailor was incarcerated for allegations of desertion, drug abuse, and orders violations. MJA first successfully litigated his release from pretrial confinement at an Initial Review Officer (IRO) hearing. Subsequently, MJA demanded a prompt and proper military medical evaluation that the command initially opted to ignore and forego. Given the advocacy of MJA and matters presented by the firm to the command, the Convening Authority elected to pursue administrative separation as opposed to court-martial. The client avoided a criminal conviction and maintained valuable benefits/entitlements with a General (under Honorable conditions) characterization of service.

Close

Portsmouth, Virginia. A Sailor tested positive for a prescription drug following a random urinalysis. In response to the positive urinalysis, MJA provided evidence to the command showing that the Sailor had not knowingly and wrongfully used a controlled substance and that the positive urinalysis was not a drug abuse incident requiring mandatory separation processing. The Commanding Officer agreed, ruling that the incident was not drug abuse, and closed the matter without taking adverse action against the Sailor.

Close

MCAS Beaufort, South Carolina. A local civilian carrying out the duties of their occupation was subject to a vehicle search on board federal property. The civilian was charged with simple possession of marijuana and criminal trespass in violation of federal law. Over the course of months, MJA worked to facilitate the dismissal of the criminal charges, thereby permitting the civilian to pursue higher education and employment opportunities.

Close

Fort Bragg, North Carolina. An Army Staff Sergeant (E-6) hired MJA after being wrongfully accused of violating Article 112a (drug abuse) after UA conducted by his command. The SSG was offered an Article 15 and pressured by senior leadership to accept the punishment and subsequent mandatory Chapter process. MJA advised the SSG to refuse the Article 15 and demand a court-martial. Working with the detailed counsel, MJA filed motions, secured the assistance of one of the best forensic toxicologists available, and fought pretrial efforts to force the SSG to plead guilty. MJA successfully fought the charges and pushed back on efforts by the government to waive the presence of material witnesses in the case. After fighting for more than a year, MJA convinced the command to withdraw and dismiss all charges in the case. All flags have been removed and the SSG has subsequently been reinstated as the platoon sergeant in his unit.

Close

Camp Lejeune, North Carolina. A Sergeant (E-5) in the Marine Corps was notified of Special Court-Martial charges for alleged drug abuse after testing positive for THC-8. Over the course of twelve months, MJA demonstrated unrelenting persistence and zeal by working to facilitate the dismissal of the criminal charges, avoid separation via notification procedures (i.e., a no-board, general discharge option), and ultimately litigate the alleged wrongful use of THC-8 at administrative separation hearing and secure a NO BASIS determination, thereby permitting the Marine to be retained and honorably complete his contract of enlistment.

Close

Marine Forces Reserve, New Orleans, Louisiana. A Sergeant (E-5) in the United States Marine Corps Reserve was being processed for involuntary administrative separation following a positive test result for delta-8-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC8). MJA aggressively challenged the separation action after conducting a thorough review of the evidence presented by the Government and the true facts and circumstances of the matter which supported innocent ingestion. After reviewing the Respondent’s detailed rebuttal matters, the imposing authority agreed that wrongful use did not occur and dismissed the pending separation action.

Close

Marine Corps Recruit Depot Parris Island, South Carolina. A Lance Corporal (E-3) in the United States Marine Corps was placed on an extended legal hold beyond his End of Active Service (EAS) date pending adjudication of false allegations of domestic violence and a legally untenable initial determination of drug abuse. MJA expertly guided the client through the command’s drawn-out investigative process and legal hold. MJA zealously represented the Lance Corporal and advocated for no legal action. Ultimately, the convening authority agreed that no wrongful use occurred and there was no probable cause to prefer charges for domestic violence or assault consummated by battery.

Close

Fort Campbell, Kentucky. An Army Specialist (E-4) hired MJA after being wrongfully accused of violating Article 112a after UA conducted by his command. The SPC was offered an Article 15. MJA advised the SPC to refuse the Article 15 and demand a court-martial. Working with the detailed counsel, MJA secured the assistance of one of the best forensic toxicologists available, interviewed command UA coordinators and other witnesses. MJA convinced the Army prosecutor the allegations against the SPC were not only not true, but that the command had improperly collected and processed the evidence. After fighting on the SPC’s behalf for almost a year, MJA convinced the command to withdraw and dismiss all charges in the case. All flags have been removed and the SPC has been allowed to PCS. (December 2023)

Close

Air National Guard, Wisconsin. A Non-Commissioned Officer in the Wisconsin Air National Guard tested positive for Delta-8 (THC-8) on a command urinalysis. The Airman was issued a Letter of Reprimand (LOR), given a Referral Enlisted Performance Report (REPR), and notified of involuntary administrative separation processing. MJA partnered with the client to aggressively defend against the allegations of wrongful drug use. MJA provided key evidence in defense and exposed errors in the command’s (mis)application of law and regulations. Following multiple formal rebuttals and informal engagement with leadership, the Commander directed that the LOR be downgraded to a Letter of Caution and not to be filed in an Unfavorable Information File; that the REPR be rescinded; and that separation processing be terminated. The NCO will now be competitive for promotion and allowed to continue their military career in pursuant of retirement. (December 2023)

Close

Marine LCpl Cleared of All Charges

Twentynine Palms, California. MJA successfully defended a Marine LCpl (E-3) accused of drug abuse, underage drinking, and assault with a deadly weapon. The parents of the Marine contacted MJA at the outset of the investigation in 2021 which allowed MJA to proactively contact the command, the Staff Judge Advocate, and law enforcement to protect the young Marine during the investigative stage. MJA helped the Marine get treatment and counseling while still fighting the charges being brought against the LCpl. MJA successfully got the charges removed from Court-Martial and later challenged the administrative discharge being sought by the command. After 18 months of challenges and responses to proposed actions by the USMC, MJA was successful in getting everything dismissed and the Marine is serving out the remainder of his enlistment contract. (February 2024)

Close

Jacksonville, Florida. A Senior Chief Petty Officer (E-8) in the United States Navy was placed under investigation after testing positive on a command directed urinalysis for Temazepam and Oxazepam. MJA worked with the Senior Chief and Investigating Officers to submit written matters and evidence to the command which supported innocent ingestion. After reviewing the extensive matters, the reviewing authorities agreed that wrongful use did not occur and directed that the positive result be cleared from the Sailor’s records. (April 2024)

Close

Naval Station Norfolk, Virginia. A junior enlisted member in the U.S. Navy, attached to a vessel, was threatened with irrefusable nonjudicial punishment (NJP) and an involuntary administrative separation, thereby denying them the opportunity for a board hearing and to meaningfully challenge a General characterization of service upon discharge. MJA aggressively challenged the purported findings of the Officer imposing NJP and the investigation of the Master at Arms investigation into alleged wrongful use of a non-controlled substance -- Delta-8 Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC 8), in violation of Article 92, UCMJ. MJA worked closely with the client to expertly respond to the allegation, which stemmed from the client's positive urinalysis. MJA quickly engaged the Sailor's leadership through the submission of written rebuttal matters, exercising proper tone and highlighting key evidence in defense in support of innocent (i.e., unknowing) ingestion of a hemp-derived substance lawfully sold and commonly found in vapes, edibles, and lotions. In light of the written matters and oral presentation of MJA counsel, the Flag Officer in command gave the Sailor the opportunity for an administrative separation board hearing in accordance with The Naval Military Personnel Manual. Given the accurate and expertly drafted rebuttal matters and evidence -- including character witness testimony --subsequently presented to the Board for consideration, the Board had no choice but to find that the Government's evidence was insufficient to establish any basis for separation. The Board denied the Government counsel's request for substantiation and separation of the client. The client will now be permitted to continue their Honorable service in the U.S. Navy and to promote. (May 2024)

Close

No Adverse Action; National Guard Soldier Successfully Rebuts Allegations of Orders Violation
Fort Eisenhower, Georgia. A Specialist in the Army National Guard was threatened with dismissal from an Army school following a formal Army Regulation (AR) 15-6 command investigation into alleged use and possession of contraband/nicotine, as specifically prohibited by the military school, in violation of Article 92, UCMJ. MJA worked closely with the client and witnesses to avoid such career-ending consequences. MJA expertly responded to the false allegations with the proper tone and highlighted key evidence in defense. In light of the rebuttal submitted to the Commanding Officer for consideration, the Commander directed that no permanent adverse action be taken against the client. The client graduated without any loss of rank or pay and will now be permitted to continue their Honorable service in the Army National Guard. (October 2024)

Close

Administrative Separation Board Finds "No Basis" After Positive Urinalysis for "Delta 8"
U.S. Fleet Cyber Command, Suffolk, Virginia. A senior enlisted member in the U.S. Navy was processed for involuntary administrative separation, thereby potentially denying them the opportunity to vest an active duty retirement and exposing them to an Other than Honorable characterization of service upon discharge. MJA aggressively challenged the purported findings of the command investigation into alleged wrongful use of a non-controlled substance -- Delta-8 Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC 8), in violation of Article 92, UCMJ. MJA worked closely with the client to expertly respond to the allegation, which stemmed from the client's positive urinalysis. MJA argued key evidence in defense in support of innocent (i.e., unknowing) ingestion of a hemp-derived substance lawfully sold and commonly found in vapes, edibles, and lotions. In light of the evidence - including character witness testimony - and the oral presentation of MJA counsel, the Board had no choice but to find that the Government's evidence was insufficient to establish any basis for separation. The Board denied the command's recommendation for substantiation and separation of the client. The client will now be permitted to continue their Honorable service in the U.S. Navy and to promote. (November 2024)

Close

Suffolk, Virginia. A Petty Officer First Class (E-6) in the United States Navy was placed under investigation after testing positive on a command directed urinalysis for delta-8 tetrahydrocannabinol (THC8). MJA worked with the Petty Officer and investigator to submit written matters and evidence to the command which supported an innocent ingestion. After reviewing the extensive matters, the reviewing authorities agreed that wrongful use did not occur and directed that the positive result be cleared from the Sailor’s records. (January 2025)

Close

Norfolk, Virginia. A Petty Officer First Class (E-6) in the U.S. Navy was processed for involuntary administrative separation after testing positive for methamphetamines during an all-hands urinalysis. MJA represented the Sailor at a board hearing and presented evidence proving the Sailor’s innocent ingestion. The Board found that the Government's evidence was insufficient to establish any basis for separation and retained the Sailor on active duty. The Sailor will now be permitted to continue their Honorable service in the Navy and to promote. (June 2025)

Close

Volk Field ANGB, Wisconsin. An TSgt (E-6) in the Air National Guard (ANG) was initially issued a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) for alleged wrongful use of Delta-8 (THC-8), a prohibited substance in violation of Department of War, U.S. Air Force, and National Guard Bureau policy and regulation. A final determination of wrongful use would effectively remove any reenlistment opportunity and trigger mandatory administrative separation processing. MJA represented the officer throughout the LOR notification and rebuttal process and successfully fought the allegations by highlighting legal and factual insufficiency. The ANG ultimately concurred with MJA and determined no wrongful use due to innocent ingestion. The Guardsman was retained in the ANG and can now continue their military career. (January 2026) Close

Camp Pendleton, California. MJA successfully defended a Marine Sergeant (Sgt) accused of unlawfully bringing steroids on base and using them in violation of Art 112a of the UCMJ. The Marine contacted MJA the day after being stopped and searched at the gate by Military Police. MJA immediately contacted the command and ensured the Sgt was protected throughout the investigation and during the months pending the disposition of the case. When detailed counsel was assigned to the matter, MJA coordinated the defense of the Sergeant at his administrative hearing. After hearing from more than 20 witness through testimony and written statements provided on behalf of the Marine, the board voted to retain the Sgt and allow him to continue working with his unit. (January 2026)

Close

Marine Corps Base Quantico, Virginia. A Marine Corporal (E-4) who tested positive for marijuana was acquitted by the military judge. The Marine Corporal received an Honorable discharge after reaching the end of his term of enlistment.

Close

Marine Corps Major Retained on Active Duty at his Board of Inquiry

Okinawa, Japan. A Major in the Marine Corps was alleged to have sexually harassed four junior officers within his command. MJA immediately entered the fray by appealing the Command Investigation all the way to the Secretary of the Navy. Despite the righteous appeal of the findings and recommendations of the Command Investigator, the Command then initiated a Board of Inquiry. Undeterred, MJA then defended the Major at his Board of Inquiry. At the Board, MJA attacked the credibility of the allegations, and uncovered clear evidence of a motive to fabricate by the four junior officers. Furthermore, MJA was able to effectively cross examine the Command Investigator, where the Command Investigator was forced to concede he used the wrong legal standard in his investigation. The Board of three Marine Colonels recommended retention on active duty and to close the file. The Major will be able to retire from the Marine Corps later this year. (January 2024) Close

A Marine Major (O-4) faced almost 10 confinement years and Dismissal for several orders violations, fraternization, adultery, and computer crimes. MJA negotiated a plea agreement whereby the Marine received no confinement or dismissal. The Marine later retired honorably.

Close

An Air Force ROTC Cadet close to graduation was notified of Administrative Disenrollment after receiving two military conditional events. After gathering extensive evidence in support of the Cadet, making a personal appearance, and submitting multiple written matters to the command, MJA convinced senior commanders that Disenrollement was not warranted. The Cadet was retained in the ROTC and will commission in the Fall. Close

A former Army Captain (O-3) was falsely alleged of assault-consummated by battery while on active duty and “titled” as part of a CID investigation. After his discharge from the Army, this titling decision showed up as an arrest on a background check. MJA submitted multiple written matters showing that the Captain did not commit the alleged offense. Upon review, the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command agreed that the allegation of simple assault-consummated by battery was “unfounded” and deleted the Captain’s NCIC entry from the FBI’s database. Close

Portsmouth, Virginia. A Navy Lieutenant Commander (O-4) was offered nonjudicial punishment for alleged violations of Articles 92 and 133, UCMJ. The LCDR refused NJP and was notified that a report of misconduct would be sent to Navy Personnel Command (PERS) requesting the LCDR’s promotion removal and recommending that the LCDR be required to show cause for retention in the naval service. Military Justice Attorneys conducted an independent investigation which uncovered exculpatory evidence previously unknown to the command. Based on this evidence, the Commanding Officer withdrew the NJP charges and routed a report of no misconduct to PERS to remove the flag from the officer’s record. Close

RAF Mildenhall, United Kingdom. An Air Force pilot was notified of administrative discharge procedures for allegations of drug abuse. While pending separation, the Officer was arrested for DUI and awarded nonjudicial punishment and a letter of reprimand. MJA guided the Officer through the lengthy separation process and submitted extensive written matters in support. After much effort, the Officer was honorably discharged from the Air Force.

Close

U.S. Army Garrison Fort Hood, Texas. An Army Major (O-4) accused of sending inappropriate and inflammatory comments over social media was ordered to Show Cause for retention in the service. After 15 years of honorable service, the Army leadership questioned whether posting a comment critical of Army policy warranted reprimand and discharge from the service. Military Justice Attorneys helped this fine officer demonstrate the value he still has for future service. The board found no misconduct and recommended that the Major be retained in the service.

Close

Naval Station San Diego, California. MJA successfully defended a Navy Lieutenant Commander (LCDR) accused of fraternization and substandard performance at a Board of Inquiry (BOI). During the BOI, the government tried to raise old and unfair allegations to prejudice the panel members but MJA aggressively fought the allegations. After hearing all the evidence, the board voted to retain the LCDR on active duty.

Close

Naval Station San Diego, California. A Navy Captain (0-6) was ordered to show cause at a Board of Inquiry (BOI) following his detachment for cause (DFC). MJA worked closely with detailed military counsel to provide the members of the BOI with a full and more fair accounting of the events leading up to the DFC. The board voted unanimously to find no basis for any of the three allegations of substandard performance of duty. The 0-6 was retained on active duty and is excited for the opportunity to continue to serve.

Close

Fort Stewart, Georgia. An Army Captain (O-3) was issued a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR) for allegedly attempting to access adult pornographic websites on his government computer while on a government network in violation of Army Regulation 25-2, Army Cybersecurity. The Captain retained MJA to defend against the allegations. MJA worked closely with the Captain to gather and submit evidence to the command showing that he did not commit the alleged violations. Based on this evidence, the GOMOR was not filed permanently, allowing him to continue his military career.

Close

Fort Campbell, Kentucky. An Army Second Lieutenant (O-1) was issued a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR) for conduct unbecoming an officer after allegedly becoming involved with a woman not his wife and disobeying an order from his commander. The Lieutenant retained MJA to defend against the allegations. MJA worked closely with the Lieutenant to gather and submit extensive evidence to the command showing that he did not commit the alleged violations. Based on this evidence, the GOMOR was not filed permanently and the Lieutenant’s flags were removed, allowing him to continue his military career.

Close

Fort Hood, Texas. An Army Chief Warrant Officer (CWO) sought help from MJA to fight a GOMOR and threats of elimination from the Army. MJA guided the CWO in gathering statements and other evidence to support the formal response submitted on his behalf. MJA then engaged with the command leadership and the CWO to ensure he had the full support of his chain of command and other mentors within his professional community. With MJA’s help, the CWO received formal notification of retention in the Army and has subsequently been selected for promotion to the next rank.

Close

Norfolk, Virginia. A Navy Lieutenant Commander (0-4) received an unfavorable response from her command when concerns were raised about unfair personnel decisions and other actions impacting members of the command. With MJA’s help, the Lieutenant Commander challenged the findings and conclusions of the command investigation, allowing her to accept new orders and continue her career.

Close

Fort Belvoir, Virginia. A Lieutenant Colonel in the United States Army was issued a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR) for alleged inappropriate conduct in the workplace. MJA worked closely with the client and detailed counsel to respond to the allegations and request that the GOMOR be modified to remove unfairly prejudicial language and not permanently filed in the officer’s AMHRR. After submitting extensive evidence in extenuation and mitigation, the GOMOR was amended and locally filed, where it will be removed after 18 months or when the Lieutenant Colonel is reassigned.

Close

A Major (O-4) in the United States Army was issued a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR) for disobeying a lawful order. MJA worked closely with the client to respond to the allegation with the proper tone and to highlight key evidence in extenuation and mitigation. After carefully considering the Major’s rebuttal, the Commander directed that the GOMOR be filed locally, where it will be removed after 18 months or when the Major is reassigned.

Close

Fort Campbell, Kentucky. An Officer in the United States Army was found by a command investigator to have committed multiple orders violations. MJA was retained to defend against the erroneous findings. MJA rebutted the allegations and worked diligently to expose substantive and procedural errors with the investigation, resulting in no adverse action taken against the service member.

Close

Navy Medicine Readiness and Training Command, Portsmouth. A Lieutenant Commander (O-4) in the United States Navy was required to show cause for retention in the naval service for alleged misconduct and substandard performance of duty following a state-court conviction for Driving While Intoxicated. At the Board of Inquiry (BOI), MJA submitted extensive written matters in defense and called multiple character witnesses who testified the LCDR should be retained on active duty. The BOI unsubstantiated the allegation of substandard performance of duty and retained the officer in the naval service.

Close

Naval Station San Diego, California. A Navy Lieutenant Commander (O-4) accused of sexual harassment and several other serious violations of the UCMJ hired MJA after being detached for cause (DFC) and offered NJP. MJA advised the LCDR to refuse the NJP and demand a Court-Martial. After many delays and months of waiting, the Navy decided to send the officer to a Board of Inquiry instead of court. MJA successfully defended the LCDR against all charges and allegations brought forward as the basis for the DFC and offer of NJP. The BOI found NO BASIS for any of the alleged misconduct and voted to retain the LCDR in the Navy.

Close

Quantico, Virginia. A Second Lieutenant (O-1) in the United States Marine Corps was investigated in accordance with the JAGMAN for an allegation of violating a lawful order related to cheating. MJA carefully and independently conducted a thorough investigation, and, in its client’s defense, MJA presented an authentic, evidence-based analysis concluding no misconduct occurred. The Convening Authority carefully considered MJA’s written matters and concurred that a Report of NO Misconduct was warranted. The Second Lieutenant is now able to promote and continue his military career.

Close

Fort Jackson, South Carolina. A retired Army Officer was lawfully engaging in permitted activities on board federal property when a professional dispute arose and the retiree found themselves unreasonably detained, investigated, and cited for crimes on board federal property. The retiree was charged with assault, disorderly conduct, destruction of government property, and criminal trespass in violation of federal law. Over the course of months, MJA worked to facilitate the dismissal of all criminal charges, thereby permitting the retiree to pursue higher education and employment opportunities.

Close

Army National Guard. A Captain (O-3) in the Army National Guard was directed to show cause for retention at a Withdrawal of Federal Recognition (WOFR) proceeding, i.e., separation action. MJA successfully litigated allegations of assault/battery by conducting its own in-depth investigation and by preparing a sound legal defense that included presentation of key witness testimony as well as irrefutable video and documentary evidence. The Board unanimously voted to retain the officer to continue his military career.

Close

Fort Belvoir, Virginia. A Field Grade Officer in the United States Army was issued a Referred Officer Evaluation Report (OER) for alleged administrative/regulatory non-compliance (body composition failure). MJA partnered with the client to successfully appeal to U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC) the command’s misapplication of Army Regulations in their case. After considering MJA’s appeal, an Army Review Board directed that the Referred OER be removed from the Officer’s Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR) and further determined that “promotion reconsideration is warranted.” This extremely favorable outcome will allow the Officer to be considered for promotion on a Special Selection Board and to continue their military career.

Close

Beaufort, South Carolina.A Chief Warrant Officer (CWO) in the United States Marine Corps was required to show cause for retention in the naval service for alleged fraternization, conduct unbecoming an officer, assault consummated by battery, and drunk and disorderly conduct. At the Board of Inquiry (BOI), MJA submitted extensive written matters in defense and called multiple witnesses to testify to the CWO's outstanding military character and to contradict the most serious allegations. The BOI unsubstantiated multiple false claims and retained the officer in the naval service. (February 2025)

Close

Fort Gordon, Georgia. A Captain (O-3) in the U.S. Army was required to show cause for retention before a Board of Inquiry after testing positive for Delta-8 Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC-8). Facing the loss of their military career and medical retirement, the officer hired MJA to defend them at the board. MJA aggressively challenged the sufficiency of the government’s evidence and requested a directed verdict at the close of the government’s case, arguing legal and factual insufficiency. The Board agreed and found no basis for the alleged drug abuse, retaining the officer on active duty. The officer will be medically retired and receive a fully honorable discharge. (May 2025)

Close

Fort Bragg, North Carolina. A Lieutenant Colonel (O-5) in the U.S. Army was required to show cause for retention before a Board of Inquiry after testing positive for Delta-9 Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC-9) and for alleged improper use of a government travel charge card. MJA filed and litigation a motion to compel discovery and requested a continuance after the government refused to provide evidence material to the case. When the new evidence was finally provided, the Show Cause authority agreed to withdraw and dismiss the Board of Inquiry, allowing the officer to medically retire. (May 2025)

Close

An officer candidate retained MJA after testing positive for cocaine during a pre-accession urinalysis. MJA submitted a notice of representation and coordinated with the command to facilitate a re-test. A subsequent determination was made of no wrongful use, and the candidate will be permitted to continue their military training. (May 2025)

Close

Mayport, Florida. An Ensign (O-1) in the U.S. Navy was notified of administrative separation processing without a board hearing due to allegations of sexual harassment and substandard performance of duty. If separated, the officer would have not only lost his career but been required to payback over a hundred thousand dollars in educational assistance. MJA represented the officer throughout the notification and rebuttal process and successfully pressed for a Board of Inquiry (BOI) to fight the allegations, despite the officer not rating a hearing. MJA zealously represented the officer at his BOI, arguing that he did not engage in sexual harassment and that his performance warranted retention. The Board unsubstantiated the allegation of sexual harassment and retained the young officer in the Naval Service. The officer can now continue his military career. (June 2025)

Close

COAST GUARD HONORABLY RETIRES ACTIVE DUTY OFFICER

A veteran Coast Guard officer was the subject of a Coast Guard Investigative Service (CGIS) investigation and potential felony-level adjudication and involuntary (early) separation for allegations of abusive sexual contact in violation of Article 120, UCMJ, among others. Facing the loss of his entire career and retirement benefits and entitlements, let alone professional reputation, the Officer hired MJA to aggressively defend him. During the disciplinary disposition decision-making phase, MJA presented compelling evidence that the allegations were baseless and unsupported by the real facts. The Coast Guard declined prosecution and approved the officer's HONORABLE retirement. Congratulations to this well-deserving client! (September 2025)

Close

Fort Drum, New York. An Army officer and combat veteran, eligible for medical retirement, was subject of an Army Criminal Investigation Division (CID) investigation and unrelated command investigation for allegations of misconduct. Facing potential felony-level adjudication and involuntary (early) separation for allegations of violating Article 128b, UCMJ, the officer hired MJA to aggressively defend him. Ultimately, the Army sought to involuntarily administratively separate him at a Board of Inquiry (BOI) with a less than honorable discharge characterization and thereby deny him a medical retirement. At the BOI, MJA presented compelling evidence that refuted allegations and that proved this officer worthy of continued service in the Army. The Board recommended "RETENTION," a phenomenal result for a most-deserving client. (August 2025)

Close

Fort Gordon, Georgia. An Army Officer approaching their 20-year active duty retirement eligibility was notified of administrative separation via "Board of Inquiry" for allegations of misconduct, namely absence without approved leave, making false statements, and conduct unbecoming, in violation of Articles 86, 92, 107, and 133, Uniform Code of Military Justice. Faced with the possibility of an Other than Honorable (OTH) discharge and no retirement, the Officer retained MJA to fight for RETENTION and RETIREMENT. MJA zealously advocated for the Officer both before and during the board, discovering evidence which provided much-needed context, extenuation, and mitigation, and which exposed weaknesses and bias in the government’s case. After hearing all the evidence, the members voted to RETAIN the Officer on active duty, allowing the Officer to fulfill their commitment to the U.S. Army and RETIRE. (November 2025) Close

Orlando, Florida. An Officer in the U.S. Army was processed for involuntary administrative separation after testing positive for a controlled substance during an all-hands urinalysis. MJA represented the Soldier at a Board of Inquiry hearing (BOI) and presented evidence proving the Soldier’s innocent ingestion. The BOI comprised of senior Army Officers found that the Government's evidence was insufficient to establish any basis for involuntary separation. The Soldier will now be permitted to continue their Honorable service in the Army and to promote. (February 2026) Close

Fort Stewart, Georgia. A Chief Warrant Officer in the United States Army was targeted for employment termination for allegations of drug abuse and absence(s) without leave. The Officer's legal defense began more than three years ago, during which time the Soldier was ostracized and their career completely sidelined. Military Justice Attorneys worked tirelessly to identify, assess, and address the legal issues presented and to prepare a defense that not only highlighted the Respondent's impeccable integrity, loyalty, and service, but also brought attention to deficiencies in the Government's case. After a fully litigated administrative discharge board (Board of Inquiry, or "BOI"), the Board members found “no bases” were met for the alleged misconduct and retained the Officer on active duty. (February 2026) Close

Servicemembers Civil Relief Act. An Army Officer leased a motor vehicle from a major car dealer and subsequently received orders to deploy overseas. After speaking with JAG, the Officer attempted to terminate his lease under the SCRA but was told by the dealer that he did not comply with lease termination requirements. MJA intervened and provided evidence that the automobile dealer failed to properly terminate the lease and did not timely refund money owed under the SCRA, including capitalized cost reduction (CCR) payments prepaid by the Officer. The dealer terminated the lease and paid monetary damages to the service member.

Close

Servicemembers Civil Relief Act. A Staff Sergeant (E-5) in the Air Force terminated her residential lease after receiving orders for deployment. While deployed, the Staff Sergeant was unlawfully assessed a debt related to her housing lease which got referred to collection. The Staff Sergeant retained MJA to assert her rights under the SCRA and seek damages. MJA gathered evidence showing that the Staff Sergeant should not have been assessed a debt after properly terminating her lease, issued a demand letter to her housing provider, and coordinated with the debt collection agency to stop collection efforts. These efforts resulted in the complete elimination of the service member’s debt, termination of debt collection efforts, and significant compensation for her damages.

Close

Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (SCRA). While attending boot camp, an active-duty Army recruit's vehicle was repossessed for an alleged breach of the purchase agreement. The Soldier retained MJA to exercise his rights under the SCRA. Upon investigation, MJA determined that the dealer failed to obtain a court order allowing the repossession prior to retaking the vehicle in violation of the SCRA. MJA sent a demand, that was ignored by the Defendant, prompting us to file suit in federal court to hold the vehicle dealer accountable. Immediately after filing, the dealer cooperated in resolving the matter. We obtained a favorable settlement that included compensation for financial and other harms and full release of all future obligations on the vehicle for the client. (December 2024)

Close

Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (SCRA): A U.S. Navy reservist brought onto active duty solely for boot camp had his vehicle repossessed. The Sailor contacted Military Justice Attorneys and retained our firm to assist him. Even after two years had passed, MJA successfully negotiated the removal of all adverse reporting to the credit bureaus and payment of financial damages. The Sailor was able to recover the full value of the vehicle that was repossessed and resolve the matter with no out-of-pocket expense. (April 2025) Close

Marine Corps Recruit Depot Parris Island, South Carolina. A Marine Corporal (E-4) was accused of sexual assaulting a woman while she slept in her marital bed. At trial by General Court-Martial, MJA was able to dismantle the convening authority’s case during cross examination of the alleged victim, and the members found the Marine not guilty of all charges.

Close

U.S. Army Training Center & Fort Jackson, Columbia, South Carolina. A decorated Army Major (O-4) was accused of sexually assaulting another officer nearly three years after the alleged incident. A panel of members at General Court-Martial found the Major not guilty on all charges.

Close

U.S. Army Garrison Fort Bragg, North Carolina. An Army Specialist (E-4) was accused of sexual assault and other sex crimes by the wife of another Soldier. Over two years after the initial allegation, the Specialist had his day in court where he was found not guilty by a military judge. MJA successfully dismantled the Government’s case in such a way that no evidence needed to be offered in the Defense case-in-chief.

Close

A Marine Corporal (E-4) accused of sexually assaulting an Army soldier faced decades of confinement and lifetime registration as a sex offender. MJA successfully defended the case at a General Court-Martial, and the Marine was acquitted of all sex crime charges. The Marine was later medically discharged under Honorable discharge.

Close

An Army Staff Sergeant (E-6) accused of 8 counts of sex crimes against 5 victims faced decades of confinement. MJA investigated the case and obtained statements from 4 victims recanting the story. MJA carried our findings to the convening authority, an Army Major General (O-8), and successfully had the charges dismissed pre-trial.

Close

A Marine Corporal (E-4) accused of sexual assault and reckless endangerment of another Marine faced a life sentence and sex offender registration. MJA successfully had all charges dropped and the Marine was allowed to separate with a general discharge.

Close

U.S. Army Training Center Fort Jackson, South Carolina. A Sergeant First Class (E-7), charged with sexual assault of a trainee, had all of his charges dismissed by the Military Judge three weeks before his General Court Martial.

Close

U.S. Army Garrison Fort Lee, Virginia. An Army Cadre was accused of sexually assaulting an AIT trainee and violating a TRADOC Regulation. At a trial by General Court-Martial, the Soldier faced the possibility of a dishonorable discharge, decades of confinement, and mandatory sex-offender registration if convicted. Despite the alleged victim’s testimony at trial and the Soldier’s videotaped statement to CID, MJA dismantled the government’s case and called multiple character on behalf of the Soldier. One charge was dismissed at trial by the military judge, while the jury found the Soldier not guilty on all remaining charges and specifications. The Soldier later reenlisted in the Army.

Close

Joint Base Charleston, South Carolina. A Senior Airman (E-4) accused by a fellow Airman of sexual assault was found not guilty by the presiding Military Judge, avoiding Brig time, punitive discharge, and any requirements to register as a sex offender.

Close

U.S. Army Garrison Vicenza (Caserma Ederle), Italy. Army Specialist (E-4) accused by his spouse of rape and strangulation was fully acquitted by a military panel of his peers. A highly complex case to defend, with over 20 witnesses from Army, Air Force and Carabinieri, forensic expert testimony, and confessions and admissions by the accused.

Close

Joint Base Langley-Eustis, Virginia. An Air Force Senior Airman (E-4) accused of sexual assaulting another Airman had charges dropped by the Convening Authority.

Close

U.S. Army Garrison Fort Lee, Virginia. Army Staff Sergeant (E-6) with more than 13 years of honorable service was accused of assaulting and raping his step-daughter. The Staff Sergeant, facing decades of confinement, dishonorable discharge, and mandatory sexual offender registration if convicted, was found not guilty by a Military Judge of all charges and specifications. Close

U.S. Army Garrison Fort Hood, Texas. An Army Private Second Class (PV2) was placed in pretrial confinement for allegations of rape and sexual assault in violation of Article 120, UCMJ. MJA successfully represented the Soldier at his Pretrial Confinement Review hearing resulting in his release from confinement. Close

U.S. Army Garrison Fort Bragg, North Carolina. An Army Specialist (E-4) was wrongfully accused of raping the wife of a fellow Soldier. MJA represented the Specialist at a Chapter Board during which MJA discredited the Government’s key witnesses and introduced evidence of the Soldier’s innocence. The Board determined the allegations were unsubstantiated and retained the Specialist in the Army. Close

Sheppard Air Force Base, Texas. An Airman First Class (E-3) was charged at general court-martial with sexually assaulting a female Airman in his training squadron. While pending trial, the command preferred an additional charge alleging that the Airman committed indecent conduct with another female Airman. Military Justice Attorneys represented the Airman at his Article 32 hearing and secured a finding that two of the sexual assault allegations were not supported by probable cause. MJA then prevented the Government from joining the new charge to the court-martial. MJA convinced the command to dismiss all charges and specifications from court-martial and resolve the matter administratively, thereby preventing any possibility of a criminal conviction, confinement, dishonorable discharge, or sex offender registration.

Close

Fort Stewart, Georgia. An Army Specialist (E-4) was charged at general court-martial with violating Article 120b (sexual abuse of a child) for allegedly committing a lewd act in the presence of a teenager. The Specialist was convinced to sign a plea agreement which would require him to plead guilty and result in his conviction, confinement, dishonorable discharge, and likely sex offender registration. The Specialist retained MJA the night before his scheduled plea. MJA immediately withdrew from the plea agreement and requested a continuance. MJA then began investigating the allegations. MJA discovered previously unknown evidence showing that the complainant had made false allegations against the client and other young men. A general court-martial trial was held almost three years after the charged incident. At trial, MJA exposed the numerous lies and inconsistencies in the alleged victim’s statement, and attacked an unlawfully obtained “confession” by the accused. The jury deliberated for less than an hour before finding the Specialist NOT GUILTY on all charges and specifications. The Specialist will be promoted to Sergeant and continue his military career.

Close

Fort Bragg, North Carolina. An Army Sergeant (E-5) nearing his ETS was flagged after being falsely accused of violating Article 120, UCMJ. The Sergeant immediately retained MJA to defend against the allegations. After enduring months of a CID investigation, the command agreed with MJA that there was not enough evidence to proceed to court-martial. The Article 120 allegations were dismissed and the Sergeant was administratively punished, resulting in a single day of extra duty. The Sergeant separated from the Army at his ETS with an honorable discharge.

Close

Fort Campbell, Kentucky. A Private First Class (E-3) in the United States Army was charged with violating Article 120, UCMJ, by allegedly sexually assaulting a female Soldier. After refusing to take a “deal” offered by the Government, the Soldier retained MJA to defend him during a general court-martial where he was faced a possible dishonorable discharge, confinement, and sex offender registration if found guilty. During trial, MJA successfully moved for the charges to be dismissed with prejudice, terminating the court-martial.

Close

Fort Hood, Texas. An Army Sergeant (E-5) accused of multiple counts of sexual abuse of a child hired MJA to defend against the egregious allegations. Almost three years after the false allegations were filed against the SGT, and after the Army involuntarily extended the Soldier’s contract to allow more time to prosecute the case, MJA successfully contested the charges at a general court-martial. Working with detailed counsel, MJA fought aggressively to ensure witnesses and experts from all over the United States were available to testify on behalf of the SGT and his family. After hearing all of the evidence, the Military Judge acquitted the SGT on all charges and specifications, finding him NOT GUILTY. The SGT is looking forward to being allowed to leave the Army with an honorable discharge.

Close

Fort Eustis, Virginia. An Army Specialist (E-4) unjustly accused of abusive sexual contact and assault with intent to commit rape hired MJA after being targeted as the subject of a CID investigation. MJA advised and represented the SPC through the investigation and resultant command determination to forgo court-martial. After many delays and months of waiting, the Army sent the Soldier to an administrative separation board instead – an “easier” path for the Government to secure accountability given its lower standard of proof and ability to prosecute with hearsay alone. MJA successfully defended the SPC against all charges and allegations brought forward as the basis for the separation. The Board found NO BASIS for any of the alleged misconduct and voted to retain the SPC in the Army.

Close

Fort Campbell, Kentucky. An Army Private First Class (E-3) was charged with an alleged sexual assault in violation of Article 120, UCMJ. After refusing to take a “deal” offered by the Government, the Soldier retained MJA to defend him during a general court-martial where he faced a possible dishonorable discharge, confinement, and sex offender registration if found guilty. During trial, MJA discovered that the Government had failed to provide important evidence helpful to the client’s case and moved to dismiss the case with prejudice. MJA later learned that this was not the only discovery violation that had occurred, and that other evidence helpful to the defense had also not been provided. After hearing all the evidence, the Court determined that the continual discovery violations prejudiced the defense and that dismissal “with prejudice” was the only just remedy under the circumstances.

Close

Camp Pendleton, California. A Marine Corporal (E-4) was charged at general court-martial with violating Article 120, UCMJ (sexual assault without consent) after allegedly assaulting a dependent spouse. The Marine retained MJA to fight the false allegations. Working closely with detailed defense counsel, MJA successfully litigated multiple pretrial motions critical to the defense case and obtained DNA testing to corroborate the Marine’s story. At trial, MJA and detailed counsel exposed deficiencies in the government’s evidence and the investigative bias of multiple government actors. After hearing all the evidence, the jury granted the Marine a “full acquittal” and returned a verdict of NOT GUILTY.

Close

Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point, North Carolina. A Marine Private First Class (E-2) suspected of sexual assault, drug abuse, domestic violence, attempted burglary, unlawful entry, and stalking was placed on pretrial restriction and notified of charges. Bracing for a general court-martial, the Marine retained MJA to defend him against a possible dishonorable discharge, confinement, and sex offender registration, if found guilty. MJA killed the looming general court-martial and negotiated a plea at a special court-martial involving a single Article 128 offense. As a result, the Marine received no jail time, no punitive discharge, no forfeitures, and no fine. The Marine was immediately released from pretrial restriction.

Close

Fort Johnson, Louisiana. After securing the release of an Army Specialist (E-4) from almost a year in pretrial confinement, MJA working with the military counsel, continued to fight the charges based on false accusations of sexual assault against the SPC and several other soldiers. MJA worked diligently with counsel for the other accused to obtain evidence which had been ignored by CID and other law enforcement agents because it was favorable to the SPC and to the other accused soldiers. MJA communicated with the lead Army prosecutors on a number of occasions to help the prosecutors get a more accurate understanding of the case. In mid December, the SPC was notified all charges and specifications against him were withdrawn and dismissed from the General Court-Martial.

Close

All Charges Dismissed With Prejudice; Airman Successfully Defends Against Sexual Assault Claims
Joint Base Charleston, South Carolina. A Non-Commissioned Officer (NCO) in the United States Air Force was placed on personnel hold pending a General Court-Martial for multiple alleged incidents of sexual assault in violation of Article 120, UCMJ. If convicted of any allegation, the client faced mandatory Dishonorable Discharge and reduction to E-1 and total forfeiture of all pay and allowances, as well as years confinement and sex offender registration. MJA worked closely with the client throughout the trial and even pre-trial phases, including the felony investigation by the Air Force Office of Special Investigations and the Article 32 pre-trial investigation. MJA aggressively defended the client and litigated every aspect of the Government's relentless prosecution. MJA in partnership with the client refused to back down -- despite the Government's utilization of seven prosecutors, multiple experts, and additional support staff. At trial, the Government waved the white flag. In light of the Court's acceptance and approval of the Government's motion to withdraw and dismiss ALL charges and specifications with prejudice at trial, the Airman's Commander directed that no further adverse action be taken against the client and that their personnel hold (flag) be lifted. The client will now be permitted to continue their honorable service on active duty through retirement. Of note, MJA also zealously represented the client in the State's Family Court and successfully contested the actions of the alleged victim who removed the child from the State without the client's consent, as unconscionably facilitated by Family Advocacy Program personnel. (February 2024)

Close

U.S. Army Garrison Fort Hood, Texas. A Private Second Class (E-2) accused by two separate women of multiple counts of rape and sexual assault spent almost nine months in jail for offenses he did not commit. Military Justice Attorneys worked with private investigators and experts prior to trial to develop information favorable to our case and to show the allegations against the Soldier were not true. MJA successfully defended the Soldier at a week long contested court-martial where he was found not guilty on all charges. MJA later helped secure a transfer from his old unit so the Soldier can get a fresh start with a new unit.

Close

Spangdahlem Air Base, Germany. A Senior Airman (E-4) was falsely accused of committing rape and sexual assault against a fellow service member. MJA represented the Senior Airman at his Article 32 hearing and convinced the Preliminary Hearing Officer to recommend dismissal of the rape charge. At trial, MJA exposed the alleged victim’s false claim of sexual assault while being blacked out drunk as spurious and uncorroborated. MJA effectively cross-examined four Government witnesses who directly contradicted the alleged victim’s claim of heavy intoxication and impeached the alleged victim on the stand with forensic evidence found on her person and her clothes seized by OSI. The Military Judge who presided over the general court-martial deliberated for less than 30 minutes before coming back with a verdict of NOT GUILTY on all charges.

Close

U.S. Coast Guard, Washington D.C. A Non-Commissioned Officer (NCO) in the U.S. Coast Guard was alleged to have committed a "hate incident" in violation of COMDTINST 5350.6, Harassing Behavior, Prevention, Response, and Accountability. The NCO was initially investigated and issued adverse administration documentation to include ineligibility for reenlistment/extension. They were also notified of involuntary administrative separation processing for misconduct with no board hearing authorized due to the nature of the alleged offense and determination of ineligibility for continued service. MJA partnered with the client to aggressively defend against the specious allegations in violation of Article 92, UCMJ. MJA expertly responded to the allegation(s) to provide key evidence and analysis in defense, and even provided keen insight to the command pertaining to errors in its (mis)application of law and regulations and procedure to the facts and circumstances of the client's case. Following multiple formal rebuttals and informal engagement with leadership, the U.S. Coast Guard pivoted in favor of the client by - amending the initial investigative findings and endorsement thereon; determining eligibility for extension; and terminating involuntary separation processing. The NCO will now be allowed to complete their pending active duty retirement. Close

Fort Stewart, GA. Army Staff Sergeant fully acquitted of larceny and solicitation to commit larceny of government property.

Close

U.S. Army Garrison Fort Hood, Texas. A Private Second Class (E-2) accused by two separate women of multiple counts of rape and sexual assault spent almost nine months in jail for offenses he did not commit. Military Justice Attorneys worked with private investigators and experts prior to trial to develop information favorable to our case and to show the allegations against the Soldier were not true. MJA successfully defended the Soldier at a week long contested court-martial where he was found not guilty on all charges. MJA later helped secure a transfer from his old unit so the Soldier can get a fresh start with a new unit.

Close