| GREG MCCORMACK HAS BEEN REPRESENTING CLIENTS
IN MILITARY COURT-MARTIALS, ADMINISTRATIVE SEPARATION ACTIONS
AND OTHER CRIMINAL CHARGES, AS WELL AS IN CIVILIAN COURTS, SINCE
HE LEFT ACTIVE DUTY AS AN ARMY LAWYER IN 1982. A REPRESENTATIVE
SAMPLING OF SOME OF THE RESULTS OF OUR CASES IS PROVIDED FOR YOUR
REVIEW.
***** DISCLAIMER ***** The following listing of specific case
results is provided for your review. You need to be aware that case
results depend upon a variety of factors unique to each case. The
listing of the case results noted below do not, in any respect,
guarantee or predict a similar result in any future case which may
be undertaken by this law firm.
• Coast Guard E-4 was charged with rape, indecent assault, adultery, indecent act and disobeying a lawful order (fraternization). Our client got himself involved in a sexual relationship with a married non-rate member of his command. Evidence presented at trial was that on the night of the alleged rape, our client sexually assaulted and raped the complainant in a sleeping bag while another member of the command was in the same room and that after the alleged rape, our client told the other service member that it was “his turn” with the complainant. When questioned by the investigators, our client made two separate incriminating statements where he indicated that the complainant pushed him off of her, said “not tonight” and that he “forced” her legs apart to have sex with her. Prior to proceeding to a member’s trial on the charges of rape and indecent assault, we plead our client Guilty to the offenses of disobeying the lawful order, adultery and indecent act (having sex with another person present). After intensive cross-examination of the complainant, we elected to rest our case without putting on any evidence whatsoever. The members quickly returned a verdict of NOT GUILTY to the offenses of rape and indecent assault. The members then needed to adjudge a sentence for the offenses that we plead our client Guilty to – the prosecution asked for a sentence of reduction to E-1, a BCD and confinement for one year. After our argument, the members imposed a sentence of reduction of one paygrade to E-3, and 45 days of hard labor without confinement.
• Navy E-4 retained our services after waiving his right to an Art 32 for child porn related offenses. The military attorney had negotiated a pretrial agreement for our client to enter a plea of guilty to possessing child pornography, in exchange for a sentencing cap of 24 months confinement. If our client had followed his military attorney’s advice, upon his conviction of the child porn related offenses, he would have been obligated to register as a sex offender and would have faced an almost certain punitive discharge and extended period of confinement. Upon being retained and investigating the facts, we determined that there was a significant search and seizure issue in the case that was apparently not addressed by the military attorney, as well as a question as to the admissibility of our client’s two (2) signed confessions. We were able to secure a withdrawal of the Art 32 waiver and took the case to an Art 32 hearing, where we were able to fully address the assorted issues in the case. As a result of our extensive cross examination of the NCIS agent which clearly established non-compliance with proper law enforcement procedures, the investigating officer recommended that the Convening Authority report the conduct of the NCIS agent to the Special Agent in Charge for appropriate action. After the Art 32, the government counsel solicited a pretrial agreement from us for the limits of a Special Court-Martial (12 mth, BCD cap that would still require sex offender registration); although that was a significant reduction from the original 2 year PTA that had been negotiated, we refused that offer. After continued negotiations, we were able to secure an administrative discharge for our client with an OTH – totally avoiding the federal conviction, punitive discharge, extensive confinement and sex offender registration that our client was about ready to walk into before we were retained.
• Navy E-6 was charged with offenses related to the sexual abuse of his two young step daughters. Before we were retained, a proposed pretrial agreement was drafted that had him entering guilty pleas to 2 specifications of rape, 3 specifications of forcible sodomy and 2 specifications of indecent acts with a child. The Art 32 investigation was also waived prior to our retention and a stipulation of fact that was very adverse to our client was prepared for his signature. Upon retention, we were able to renegotiate the terms of the pretrial agreement which provided for our client pleading guilty to 2 specifications of non-forcible sodomy and 2 specifications of indecent acts with a child. The Government agreed to withdraw and dismiss the 2 rape charges, as well as the 2 forcible sodomy charges that the original PTA that was proposed had our client pleading Guilty to. We also were able to significantly reduce the adverse nature of the stipulation of fact and reduce the maximum confinement under the terms of the PTA by 2 years.
• Navy E-9 was charged with rape and sexual harassment of
an E-6 subordinate. The complainant alleged that our
client raped her while she was intoxicated, and possibly drugged. During
the course of the Art 32 investigation, through aggressive cross-examination
of the complainant, we were able to effectively invalidate the
rape complaint. The rape charge was withdrawn after the Art
32 in a negotiated agreement which provided for our client accepting
non-judicial punishment for sexual harassment and fraternization,
upon the condition of our client being able to retire after the
NJP proceedings.
• Air Force NCO was charged with rape of his daughter, forcible
sodomy of his wife, 4 assaults upon his wife and threatening to
kill his wife. At the Art 32, his wife alleged for the first
time that he also raped her, so a charge of raping his wife was
also referred to a General Court-Martial. After a contentious
members trial, the jury found him not guilty of all offenses, except
2 specifications of assault upon his wife, and a lesser included
offense of indecent acts with his daughter - that offense carried
a mandatory sex offender registration. Although he
was sentenced to serve 6 mths of confinement, reduction to E-1,
total forfeitures of pay and allowances, he was not punitively
discharged. In our post-trial submissions, we were
able to secure the disapproval, and DISMISSAL of the sex offense
charge of indecent act upon his daughter which will eliminate the
requirement of our client to register as a sex offender.
• Navy E-7 was charged with violating Article 80, UCMJ for
attempting to communicate indecent language to a child, as well
four (4) specifications of Article 134, UCMJ, for using the
internet to solicit a minor for immoral purposes, attempted transfer
of obscene materials, as well as possession and distribution of
child pornography. Our client was facing an Art 32 investigation
as a prelude to a General Court-Martial. After our office
was retained, we were able to negotiate a pre-trial agreement that
provided for the case being referred to a Special Court-Martial,
rather than a General Court-Martial where our client would likely
face a dishonorable discharge, as well as several years of confinement. We
were also able to secure the withdrawal of two of the Art 134 specifications
relating to using the internet to solicit a minor and to attempt
to transfer obscene material. Although the judge sentenced
our client to a bad conduct discharge, 12 months of confinement,
reduction to paygrade E-1 and a fine of $10,000.00, we were later
able to secure the Command's agreement to suspend the confinement
sentence in excess of 6 months - our client ended up serving only
5 months, less good time of 25 days. The fine was also
disapproved pursuant to the terms of the Pre-Trial Agreement, and
his family was permitted to receive his pay during his confinement
despite automatic forfeitures. Although his trial was
scheduled to occur prior to the Christmas holiday, we were also
able to secure an agreement to defer commencement of confinement
until after the holidays, so that he could be with his family for
the holidays.
• Navy E-7 with 17 years of service was charged by civilian
authorities with sexually molesting a 12 year old girl. Prior to
our involvement in his case, he entered into a pre-trial diversion
agreement (PDA). Unknown to him, this PDA qualified as a "Civilian
Conviction" and triggered mandatory separation processing
from the Navy. At his subsequent administrative separation board,
we convinced the members that the evidence did not support a finding
that he committed the alleged misconduct. As a result, our client
was RETAINED in the Navy.
• Navy E-6 charged with raping and sexually assaulting his
step daughter over several years, as well as the assault and battery
on his step daughter and son. In a negotiated plea agreement, we
were able to secure the Government's withdrawal of the rape charge,
as well as the charge of assault on his son, in addition to the
merger of three specifications of sexual assault into one specification.
The Government further provided a sentence limitation, with the
understanding the Government would still prosecute the merged "mega-specification"
of sexual assault. In a trial before the military judge alone, our
client was found NOT GUILTY of the remaining sexual assault charge
and received a time served sentence (200 days) and reduction to
E-3 for the assaults upon his step daughter which resulted in a
perforated ear drum, and permanent scarring on her back from being
struck by a belt.
• A Navy Sailor was charged with assaulting a female Senior
Chief with the intent to commit rape as she slept in Female CPO
Berthing on their ship. He was immediately placed into pre-trial
confinement where he remained until trial. After extensive pre-trial
negotiations, we secured a Pre-Trial Agreement wherein the Convening
Authority agreed to dismiss the charge of assault with the intent
to commit rape in return for a plea of guilty to a lesser included
offense. At the court-martial, we raised a motion, arguing that
our client's time spent in pre-trial confinement was unusually harsh
and warranted additional pre-trial confinement credit. The military
judge agreed and awarded 2 for 1 credit for each day our client
was confined prior to trial. As a result of this 2 for 1 ruling,
our client was released immediately from confinement .
• Navy E-4 was the subject of an internet sting operation
by authorities. After several on-line instant message chats with
a person he thought was a 14 year old girl, he arranged to meet
the girl for the purpose of engaging in sexual relations. Upon
arrival at the meeting place, he was apprehended by NCIS for on-line
solicitation of a minor to engage in carnal knowedge. After his
apprehension, he left his command without authority and missed
ship's movement. Although we secured a recommendation that the
case be referred to a Special Court-Martial from the investigating
officer at the Art. 32 investigation, the charges were referred
to a General Court-Martial where our client faced a maximum punishment
of life in prison and a Dishonorable Discharge. Through extensive
pre-trial negotiations we were able to secure a pre-trial agreement
that called for the dismissal of a charge of attempt to communicate
indecent language to a minor, as well as missing movement, with
a sentencing limitation that would suspend all confinement in
excess of one year. After presentation of evidence and argument
at the sentencing phase of our trial, our client was sentenced
to serve only 85 days of confinement, to be reduced to E-2 and
to pay a $ 5,000.00 fine. He was not sentenced to be punitively
discharged from the Navy. The military judge then recommended
on the record that the command consider returning our client to
the fleet. Despite the fact that our client agreed in the Pretrial
Agreement to be administratively separated from the Navy with on
OTH if he was not punitively discharged by the judge, our client
has in fact been retained and was returned to the fleet to continue
his career in the Navy
• Army E-5 was charged with rape and indecent assault of
a junior soldier in the barracks. Upon questioning by CID, our client
gave significantly contradictory versions of events. One of his
"friends" appeared at trial and testified as to differing
stories that our client gave to him - from nothing happened, to
they had sex. Our client's DNA was found on the womans shirt after
the alleged rape. Although our client was convicted of the indecent
assault on an earlier occasion, the jury found our client NOT GUILTY
of rape. Our client never took the witness stand. On sentencing,
although he was sentenced to a BCD and assorted other punishments
for the indecent assault charge, he was NOT SENTENCED TO CONFINEMENT.
• Army E-6 reservist was charged with the rape of another
soldier in his unit while deployed to Afghanistan, as well as the
assault upon another female soldier and adultery. During our extensive
cross examination of the complainants at the Art. 32 investigation,
numerous inconsistencies were developed resulting in the recommendation
of the investigating officer to dismiss the rape and assault charges.
We were thereafter able to secure dismissal of the charges conditioned
upon our client accepting an Art. 15 for adultery. At the Art. 15
hearing, our client was not reduced, and was finally allowed to
return home after many months of being held beyond his release date
from active duty.
• Navy officer, Naval Academy Graduate, with approximately
10 years of service, punished at NJP for fraternization with enlisted
member of another service, as well as conduct unbecoming for detailing
relationship, to include sexual activity and cover-up of relationship,
in an on-line "blog," which the Government accessed, saved
and presented at Board of Inquiry (BOI). BOI resulted in unanimous
vote to retain officer on active duty, thereby permitting officer
to complete service and separate with no adverse indication on DD-214
or other separation paperwork; and, security clearance was not revoked,
thus avoiding future employment issues.
• Coast Guard E-3 was charged with attempted rape and indecent
assault upon a female crew member after he was found in the female's
rack on the ship. Both the alleged victim and our client were intoxicated,
however our client later gave a very damaging statement to the investigator.
Before the Art. 32, we were able to negotiate a pre-trial agreement
which provided for dismissal of the attempted rape charge and a
plea of guilty to a lessor offense on the sexual assault charge
- that plea would eliminate the requirement of our client to register
as a sexual offender. The deal provided for the government to suspend
any confinement in excess of one year. At trial, after the military
judge accepted our client's plea to the lessor charge, the prosecution
asked the judge to sentence our client to 18 months of confinement
and a Bad Conduct Discharge. Despite the prosecution's argument,
we secured a sentence of only 30 days of confinement and reduction
to E-1 - the judge did not discharge our client.
• Navy E-6 was charged with the rape, sodomy and sexual assault
of his stepdaughter over a period of several years. The accusations
came out when our client was in Afghanistan and upon his return
to the country, he was immediately placed into pretrial confinement.
After preferral of charges, the government proposed terms for a
pretrial agreement with the cap on confinement being 27 years if
the agreement was signed before the Art. 32 investigation, as well
as other caps ranging from 32 years to life with possibility of
parole, depending upon when the pretrial agreement was signed. In
addition to the sexual offenses against the child, our client was
also charged with sexual assault upon his wife, possession of child
pornography, assault and battery on two of his other stepchildren
and assorted other offenses that involved theft, transportation
and possession of military explosives and ammunition. In addition,
the government counsel notified the defense that they intended to
present evidence of a prior child sexual assault allegedly committed
by our client 17 years earlier. Prior to trial, several charges
were withdrawn including the alleged sexual assault of his wife,
as well as the child pornography offense. Several weeks before trial,
the prosecution provided us with notice of evidence that on its
face, appeared to be devastating to our case - that the child's
DNA was found on some adult sex toys that the child was at that
point saying our client used on her. Prior to trial, we negotiated
a pretrial agreement that provided for entry of guilty pleas to
some of the military related offenses in exchange for a confinement
cap of 17 years if our client was convicted of the sex offenses,
yet allowing us to take the sex offenses, as well as the assault
and battery charges to a jury. After several days of trial, and
four hours of deliberations, the jury returned with a verdict of
NOT GUILTY of all charges related to the sexual abuse of the stepdaughter,
as well as the assault and battery of the other stepchildren –
we secured those acquittals without our client testifying and we
presented no evidence in our defense case.
• Navy E-4 was charged with rape, sodomy and indecent acts
upon his 10 year old step-daughter, in addition to assorted charges
related to opening mail, fraudulent use of credit cards and fraudulent
enlistment. We negotiated a pre-trial agreement wherein our client
agreed to plead guilty to the non-sex charges, in order to reduce
our client's maximum exposure in the event of conviction on the
sex charges from life without possibility of parole, to 15 years.
We then took the charges of rape, sodomy and indecent acts to a
contested trial, with a jury. After extensive cross-examination
of the alleged victim and another relative, we rested our case without
presenting any evidence. The jury deliberated for only 54 minutes
and returned a verdict of NOT GUILTY of all of the sex charges.
We then proceeded to the sentencing phase on the remaining charges
to which our client entered a plea of guilty and the jury sentenced
him to only be reduced to paygrade E-1, and a partial forfeiture
of pay for 2 months.
• Navy Warrant Officer was charged with multiple sexual related
offenses with females on his command. Although we negotiated a rather
favorable pre-trial agreement which protected him from extensive
confinement, the client was more concerned with attempting to save
his career for retirement eligibility. We eventually rejected the
plea agreement and took the case to a members trial. Although we
secured an acquittal of many of the charges, the client was convicted
of some very serious offenses and was sentenced to a short period
of confinement, but was not dismissed from the Navy. The command
then initiated a Board of Inquiry in an effort to administratively
discharge our client to deny him retirement benefits. When we appeared
before the Board, our client was RETAINED, which permitted him to
continue his career and to retire when he desired to do so.
• A Seaman was charged with forcibly raping and sodomizing
his niece. The case proceeded with military counsel through the
Article 32 Investigation. Within several weeks of our representation
of the client after the Article 32, all charges were WITHDRAWN.
• Navy officer charged with fraternization with 3 enlisted
females, as well as 3 specifications of assault and battery upon
one of the enlisted females, false official statement and adultery.
The Government had a video tape of sexual activity by our client
with one of the enlisted females that occurred in our client's stateroom
on a Navy ship. We were able to negotiate a pretrial agreement that
provided for withdrawal of all charges except 2 specifications of
fraternization, with a cap of 30 days of confinement. At trial,
we secured a sentence of 60 days restriction, forfeiture of pay
and a reprimand. Our client DID NOT SERVE ANY CONFINEMENT AND WAS
NOT PUNITIVELY DISCHARGED from the Navy.
• Navy E-5 plead guilty and was convicted in state court
of sexual assault upon his young step-daughter and was sentenced
to serve 123 months in state prison, with all but 4 months suspended,
conditioned up participation in an intense sexual offender treatment
and probation program. The command was extremely dissatisfied with
the sentence of the state court, and upon his release from state
jail, immediately placed him into pretrial confinement with the
intention of taking him to a General Court-Martial. Military defense
counsel attempted to persuade the Navy to terminate court-martial
proceedings, however the command insisted on the case proceeding
to trial. Our law firm was retained after pretrial negotiations
were initiated, with the command taking the position that the lowest
cap on confinement that the command would agree to was 14 years.
Upon our retention, we immediately challenged the assumption of
jurisdiction by the Navy after the state concluded its prosecution.
In an effort to avoid our client being court-martialed, we submitted
a request for discharge in lieu of court-martial. The case proceeded
to the Art. 32 hearing, at which time we were able to establish
that our client was not properly advised of his rights by a NCIS
agent during his interrogation that was conducted primarily by the
civilian police. After the Art. 32, the command APPROVED OUR REQUEST
FOR DISCHARGE IN LIEU OF COURT-MARITAL and our client was discharged
from the Navy with an OTH and immediately released from pretrial
confinement to start participation in the state sexual offender
treatment and probation program.
• Senior Naval officer was charged with allegations related
to sexual harassment arising from multiple alcohol-related incidents.
We advised officer to refuse Non-Judicial Punishment, which likely
would have lead to General Courts-Martial. The command declined
to take the case to Courts-Martial, however Naval Personnel Command
directed that the officer appear before a Show Cause Board of Inquiry.
Although the Board did find misconduct, the Board recommended the
officer be RETAINED in the Navy, allowing the officer to retire
as scheduled.
• A Navy Second Class was charged with sexual related charges
involving a co-worker who alleged that he exposed himself and masturbated
in front of her on numerous occasions at work. After the Article
32, all charges were DISMISSED.
• Army 0-6 was charged by civilian authorities with solicitation
for immoral purposes. We secured a DEFERRED DISPOSITION and eventual
DISMISSAL of the charges.
• A Naval aviator was charged by civilian authorities with
indecent exposure related to allegations of solicitation for immoral
purposes in a public rest room. After an extended trial, the judge
agreed to defer findings on the allegations for twelve months, after
which the charges were DISMISSED. The aviator was returned to his
flight duties after trial and his criminal arrest record was EXPUNGED.
• Air Force E-6 was charged with using his government computer
for accessing pornography on the internet. The AF defense attorney
recommended that our client accept NJP. Upon our advice, our client
refused NJP and at a Special Courts-Martial, we secured an ACQUITTAL
of all charges before a jury.
• A Navy E-3 was charged with forcibly raping the same female
sailor on three different occasions. The client's military counsel
recommended client waive the Art. 32 and sign a pretrial agreement
to some lesser charges of sexual assault, where he would face a
BCD and six months in the brig. We were retained just prior to the
case proceeding to trial on the guilty plea. We were able to get
the case back on track for an Article 32 Investigation, after which
all charges were WITHDRAWN.
• Air Force NCO charged by civilian authorities with Aggravated
Sexual Battery and Indecent Liberties with his step daughter was
found NOT GUILTY of the Indecent Liberties charge and the jury DEADLOCKED
on the remaining charge resulting in a MISTRIAL. The prosecution
did not proceed any further on the charge the jury deadlocked on
and that charge was WITHDRAWN.
• Civilian Federal Employee Shipworker issued Letter of Reprimand
for alleged sexual harassment and improprieties towards several
military personnel to include improper advances, offer of staying
at shipworker's residence, staring and inappropriate personal inquiries.
Upon receipt of rebuttal and verbal explanation of true circumstances
of military personnel improperly standing fire watch and dereliction
in the performance of their duties, letter of reprimand removed
from personnel file and client fully vindicated of any alleged wrongdoing.
• Navy petty officer retained us a few days before he was
scheduled to appear at a General Court-Martial on a charge of rape.
The plea agreement, negotiated by his military lawyer and signed
by our client before we were retained, required him to plead guilty
to rape, and provided him with a sentencing protection that would
subject him to serving up to seven (7) years of confinement. Although
our client admitted to continued sexual penetration of the complainant
after she told him to stop, we felt he had a defense to the rape
charge based upon his confession which stated that the complainant
consented to the initial penetration. Upon retention, we withdrew
from the pretrial agreement and took the case to an Art. 32 hearing.
After the Art. 32, we were able to renegotiate the plea agreement,
which provided that our client would enter a plea of guilty to a
lessor offense of indecent assault, with the Government being able
to proceed on the rape charge. During the contested trial on the
rape charge, after our extensive cross-examination of the complainant,
the prosecutor advised the court that he felt ethically bound to
disclose that the complainant may have testified falsely on cross-examination.
Despite that fact, as well as the fact that we developed numerous
inconsistencies in her testimony on cross-examination, our client
was still convicted of the rape charge. However, in the plea agreement
we negotiated, we were able to reduce our client’s exposure
of confinement from the seven (7) years the military lawyer had
negotiated, to only four (4) years. Unquestionably, by taking the
rape case to trial, we were successful in bringing many facts to
the attention of the court that would not have been revealed had
he plead guilty to the rape charge as he was scheduled to do under
the terms of the plea agreement negotiated by the military lawyer
which resulted, in our opinion, a much lower sentence by the court.
Furthermore, our client now has significant appellate issues in
his case that he would not otherwise have.
• A junior Air Force enlisted man was charged by civilian
authorities with several offenses related to engaging in sexual
relations with underage girls. We secured the WITHDRAWAL of all
charges prior to the preliminary hearing.
• Navy petty officer retained us a few days before he was
scheduled to appear at a General Court-Martial on charges of rape
and sodomy. The plea agreement which was signed by our client before
we were retained, required him to plead guilty to rape which carried
a maximum punishment of life without possibility of parole. Although
our client signed a confession for the investigator wherein he admitted
to sexually assaulting and committing sodomy of the complainant
who was non-responsive due to intoxication, we felt he had a defense
to the rape charge based upon his confession. Upon retention, we
withdrew from the pretrial agreement and waived the Art. 32 in an
effort to avoid the sodomy charge being changed to a forcible sodomy
charge which our client effectively confessed to. We were then able
to renegotiate the plea agreement that provided that our client
plead guilty to a lessor charge of attempted rape and sodomy, which
subjected him to a maximum punishment of 25 years (instead of life
without possibility of parole as provided for under his original
plea agreement). After the military judge accepted the pleas, although
he sentenced our client to two years of confinement (the plea agreement
provided for suspension of any sentence in excess of 12 months),
he did NOT reduce our client’s rank, and most notably, our
client was NOT SENTENCED TO A PUNITIVE DISCHARGE.
• A senior Naval officer was charged by civilian authorities
with charges related to solicitation for immoral purposes. The charges
were DISMISSED upon our motion after cross-examination of the undercover
police officer. After trial, we secured an EXPUNGEMENT of the arrest
record.
• Civilian was charged in state court with rape and two counts
of forcible sodomy of his step-daughter. Prior to trial, we secured
a favorable ruling from the Court which prevented the prosecution
from presenting evidence obtained during a physical examination
of the child. Extensive defense cross-examination of the child developed
significant issues as to the credibility of the child. After the
prosecution rested its case, we concluded that the best course was
not to present any evidence, so we rested our case. The jury returned
an ACQUITTAL on all charges in 50 minutes.
• Naval Academy Midshipman in his senior year was accused
of rape, sodomy and assorted offenses against another Midshipman.
After the Art. 32 Investigation, apparently as a result of discovery
issues which we raised, all charges were WITHDRAWN before trial.
• A Navy petty officer was charged with rape of a shipmate.
As a result of the ART. 32 Investigation, the charges were WITHDRAWN.
• A Naval officer was charged with sexual assault of a dependent
wife. After the Art. 32 Investigation during which we established
significant issues as to the credibility of the complainant, the
case was sent to Captain's Mast on board a Naval ship, at which
time the officer was found guilty and reprimanded. Subsequent to
the Captain's Mast, we were able to secure the SETTING ASIDE of
the Mast, as well as the termination of administrative separation
proceedings. We thereafter assisted our client is securing his promotion
which had been held in abeyance due to the charges and our client
has been promoted once again.
• Junior Navy enlisted man was prosecuted by state authorities
for forcible rape of a woman in a motel room. The prosecution had
a video tape of our client, and of his friend, which showed the
girl in the motel room, passed out from alcohol, lying in a pool
of vomit. Our client was ACQUITTED of the charge.
• Navy enlisted member was one of several men charged in
state court with the brutal capital murder and rape of a young dependent
wife. Our client confessed to being involved in the rape, but said
he left before the woman was murdered by the others. Through extensive
pretrial investigation, we were able to determine that the police
had placed an informant in jail with one of the co-defendants. We
secured an Order from the Court that the informant was required
to testify in advance of trial at which time he testified that he
overheard our client talking with the co-defendant to the effect
that our client admitted that he stabbed the victim. After he testified,
we were able to secure recantation of the informant’s testimony
to eliminate that testimony which would have come against us at
trial after our client had testified. Despite the fact that three
co-defendants also implicated our client in the murder, we were
able to secure a pre-trial reduction of the capital murder charge
to premeditated murder, and then at trial, we secured an ACQUITTAL
of the murder charge. Although our client was convicted of rape,
based upon his confession, we were able to secure an extremely light
sentence of eight and one-half years. Four other co-defendants were
each convicted of murder and rape and each were sentenced to two
life terms. This case attracted national attention and was the subject
of a television documentary which featured Mr. McCormack.
• Second Class Petty Officer was charged with the forcible
rape and sexual assault of his twelve-year-old stepdaughter. Government
witnesses alleged that the client drugged the child before raping
her. Extensive evidence was presented by government and defense
expert witnesses on the "rape trauma syndrome." Case proceeded
to a General Courts-Martial, where client was found NOT GUILTY of
the rape and sexual assault charges by an enlisted jury.
• A Navy E-5 retained our firm to represent him on the appeal
of his General Courts-Martial conviction for two counts of rape
for which he was sentenced to serve 12 years in confinement. After
his trial, one of his court members allegedly made a comment that
indicated the member may have failed to disclose disqualifying information
in the jury selection proceedings. We filed a Motion for Mistrial
and secured a post–trial hearing. After intense cross–examination
of one of the court members, we successfully argued the case to
obtain entry of a MISTRIAL order, resulting in the IMMEDIATE RELEASE
OF OUR CLIENT FROM CONFINEMENT (our client had served a year at
Ft. Leavenworth) and DISMISSAL OF THE CHARGES. Upon retrial (in
which we were not involved), the sailor received a very short period
of additional confinement.
• Navy E-4 was charged with rape and forcibly sodomy of a
female shipmate. The alleged victim contended she was intoxicated
and asleep at the time of the repeated assaults. Our client was
subjected to 3 NCIS interrogations where he gave conflicting statements
after a polygraph examination. We secured a complete ACQUITTAL of
all charges, without putting on any evidence in our case, before
an enlisted jury.
• Air Force NCO was charged with indecent sexual assault
of a junior co-worker in a public bathroom. If convicted, he would
have certainly faced a lengthy period of confinement, a punitive
discharge and a federal conviction and would have been required
to register as a sexual offender. Two days prior to the start of
his General Court-Martial trial, after a weekend of non-stop negotiation,
we were able to secure the withdrawal of charges based upon our
client accepting an Art. 15 for an indecent act (consensual sexual
conduct in a public bathroom). He was reduced one pay grade, and
lost some pay, but will be allowed to retire from the Air Force.
• Coast Guard E-4 was charged by civilian authorities with
rape and abduction of a civilian co-worker. Our client acknowledged
that he did have sexual relations with the woman, at the work place,
but contended the acts were consensual. At the trial, we prevailed
on a motion to preclude the prosecutors from putting on evidence
related to vaginal injuries which resulted in the WITHDRAWAL of
the charges by the civilian authorities. The Coast Guard then charged
our client with rape and forcible sodomy. Prior to the Art. 32 Investigation,
we were able to secure a WITHDRAWAL of those charges also.
• Male Naval Officer was charged with sexually assaulting
three junior enlisted men in a health care setting. The officer
acknowledged having contact with the genitalia of two of the men,
however defended his actions as being medically necessary. The officer
was found NOT GUILTY of all charges by a General Courts-Martial
jury.
• Command Master Chief with twenty years of service was charged
with raping a young female sailor who worked in his office. After
the Article 32 Investigation, all charges were WITHDRAWN.
• Navy corpsman was charged with sexually assaulting two
female patients under his care. Both victims positively identified
our client as having committed the sexual assaults. Our client made
a statement to the investigators to the effect that he did “massage”
one of the patients and a search of his barracks resulted in recovery
of potentially damaging evidence. Pre-trial negotiations were attempted
without success, so the case proceeded to an enlisted jury, which
ACQUITTED our client of all charges.
• Navy Petty Officer was charged with rape of a shipmate.
After the Art. 32, in order to avoid the risks associated with proceeding
on the rape charge, we were able to secure an administrative discharge
for our client in lieu of court-martial, based upon his agreement
that he engaged in sexual contact in a room with an unlocked door
when another person was present in the house. Although the discharge
was under other than honorable conditions, we told our client we
felt we could possibly get his discharge upgraded after he was out
of the Navy. Once he was discharged, we filed a petition for upgrade
of the discharge on the grounds that the act he admitted to was
not a criminal offense worthy of an adverse discharge - the Board
for Correction agreed and upgraded his discharge to an Honorable.
• Enlisted Marine was charged with 26 offenses against his
wife, to include rape, maiming, 5 specifications of forcible sodomy
and 11 specifications of assault. After the Art. 32, we were able
to negotiate a plea agreement which resulted in a Guilty plea to
only 4 specifications (maiming, two assaults and communicating a
threat) which significantly limited his confinement exposure from
life without parole to 11 years. The prosecution asked for a seven
year sentence and although the judge imposed a 5 year sentence,
our client's confinement was limited to 15 months under the terms
of the plea agreement we negotiated. The remaining 22 specifications
were DISMISSED.
• Naval Chief Petty Officer with 19 years of service was
charged with internet child pornography related offenses, as well
as pornography related offenses on the service member's office computer.
After extensive pre-trial negotiations, a favorable plea agreement
was reached where the office pornography related allegations were
dismissed, with further agreement to limit the reduction to not
exceed two pay grades, limiting confinement to not exceed ninety
days and suspending a punitive discharge. At trial, we secured a
sentence of a one grade pay reduction and 89 days of confinement.
After the trial, the command initiated administrative separation
action for misconduct in an effort to deny the service member his
retirement. We secured a RETENTION recommendation from the Board,
allowing the service member to retire.
• Navy enlisted member retained us after he had signed a
pretrial agreement negotiated by his military lawyer which called
for him to plead guilty to several sexual offenses involving minors
and capped his confinement at 42 months. Upon entering the case,
we withdrew from the pretrial agreement, filed pretrial motions
and eventually were able to renegotiate the pretrial agreement for
a confinement cap of 21 months, SAVING OUR CLIENT 21 MONTHS OF CONFINEMENT.
• A junior Naval enlisted man was charged with forcible sodomy
and forcible object penetration in state court. Prior to the preliminary
hearing, we secured the sworn admission from the alleged victim
that all sexual acts were consented to and thereafter secured a
DISMISSAL of the criminal charges.
• Army company commander was charged with several offenses
surrounding allegations that he maltreated and fraternized with
female members of his command in addition to using indecent language
to his enlisted subordinates. After our representation at the Art.
32 wherein we were able to aggressively confront his accusers, all
charges were WITHDRAWN.
• A Navy E-2 was charged with raping a fourteen-year-old
with a couple of his friends. The girl named our client as the rapist,
and after hours of interrogation by NCIS, our client signed a sworn
statement wherein he admitted to being the rapist. At trial we were
able to convince a jury that his confession was not reliable and
that the girl misidentified the client. He was ACQUITTED of all
charges.
• Military physician was charged with sexually assaulting
a female patient while examining her alone in his office. The officer
was found NOT GUILTY of all charges by a General Courts-Martial
jury.
• A Navy E-7 was taken to NJP on a ship for several allegations
of sexual harassment. At the Administrative Separation Board, we
secured a finding of NO MISCONDUCT as to the sexual harassment allegations.
• Army E-2 was charged with forcible sodomy and three counts
of rape related to an incident where several soldiers were drinking
in a motel room. The government had witnesses ready to testify that
the alleged victim was highly intoxicated and that our client repeatedly
kept engaging in sexual activity despite being pulled off of her
and told to leave her alone. Prior to the Art. 32 Investigation,
we submitted a request for discharge in lieu of Courts-Martial which
the prosecution staff effectively laughed at due to the seriousness
of the charges. Despite upper level chain of command and SJA recommendations
that the discharge request be denied, we were able to secure approval
of the request and our client totally AVOIDED CRIMINAL PROSECUTION
on charges that easily could have put him in prison for life.
• An E-6 in the Navy was charged with raping and sexually
abusing his stepdaughter while photographing and videotaping the
sex acts. Two independent witnesses testified that they allegedly
saw the video tape of the accused having sex with the child. Client
was offered a seven year pretrial agreement, but we rejected it
and took the case to an enlisted jury, where he was ACQUITTED of
all charges.
***** DISCLAIMER *****
The following listing of specific case
results is provided for your review. You need to be aware that case
results depend upon a variety of factors unique to each case. The
listing of the case results noted below do not, in any respect,
guarantee or predict a similar result in any future case which may
be undertaken by this law firm
|
