Result: Restricted Filing; Minimal Punishment

The accused, an Army SFC, faced a field grade article 15 due to drinking alcohol in violation of General Order Number 1. Attorney Barry previously represented the accused during a CID investigation, resulting int the more serious Article 120 violations being dismissed. Attorney Barry drafted the accused's matters for the second reading, pointing out mitigating factors in the accused's personal life.  The accused's Article 15 was filed in the restricted section of his AMHRR and received minimal punishment, lessening the effect on his career.

Result: Not Guilty

The accused, an Army SPC, faced a field grade Article 15 for alleged theft from the PX.  Attorney Barry drafted the accused's rebuttal matters, demonstrating that the accused did switch the boxes of two pairs of shoes; however, that it was an accident.  Attorney Barry also drafted a legal letter demonstrating that if it was an accident, then he was not Guilty of Larceny.  The imposing authority agreed with Attorney Barry and found the accused Not Guilty.

Result: No Reduction in Rank

The accused, an Army E5, faced a Field Grade Article 15 from her Brigade Commander due to multiple failures to report. Attorney Barry assisted the accused, on a short timeline, pointing out the mitigating factors.  The accused was allowed to keep her rank and faced no other punishment

Result: No Reduction in Rank

The accused, an AGR SFC, faced an article 15 for sexual harassment. Attorney Barry spoke to additional witnesses, including the alleged victim (who supported the accused and did not feel harassed).   While the accused was found Guilty, he was allowed to keep his rank (of note, E7s can lose rank at an Article 15 proceeding in the National Guard).  He continues to serve as a recruiter.

Result: Not Guilty of Extramarital Sexual Conduct; punishment suspended

The accused, an Army MSG, faced a field grade article 15 for extramarital sexual conduct and for the perception of an inappropriate relationship.  Attorney Barry collected additional evidence and drafted the accused's matters for his second reading.  Despite an eye-witness claiming she saw the accused having sex with someone not his wife,  the accused was found Not Guilty. He was found Guilty for creating the perception of an inappropriate relationship, but had the punishment suspended.

Result: No rank reduction; minor punishment

The accused, an active duty SSG in Special Forces, faced a field grade article 15 for extramarital sexual conduct.  Attorney Barry drafted the accused's matters and prepared him for the second reading. Despite there being video proof of sexual conduct occurring, the accused was allowed to keep his rank and received only minor punishment. The accused was allowed to medically retire.

Result: Filed in Restricted Section of his AMHRR

The accused faced an article 15 for allegations of domestic violence.  Attorney Barry gained the support of the alleged victim and prepared the accused's written matters. While the accused was found guilty and lost one rank, the Article 15 was filed in the restricted section of his AMHRR, which ultimately helped him be retained in the Army, despite the serious nature of the allegations made against him.

Result: Transferred to the Restricted Section of the AMHRR

Attorney Willard conducted a thorough review of the accused’s case and military records, and he worked with the accused to draft a persuasive response for the DASEB while also assisting the accused in collecting various support letters from his command and senior Army leaders to include as part of the submission. Ultimately, the DASEB determined the purpose of the Article 15 had been served, and the DASEB granted the accused’s request to transfer his Article 15 from 2020 to the restricted portion of his AMHRR. The accused continues to serve with no adverse information in the official portion of his AMHRR.

Result: Not Guilty

The accused, a SGT, faced a field grade article 15 for having an intimate and sexual relationship with a SPC.  Attorney Barry drafted the accused's matters for his second reading, demonstrating that the accused's conduct did not legally amount to fraternization. The imposing authority agreed and found him Not Guilty.

Result: Not Guilty

The accused, a SSG, faced a field grade article 15 for several allegations of assault and indecent communication. Attorney Barry collected substantial additional evidence and presented it to the imposing Commander. The new evidence demonstrated that the accused was actually the victim of the predatory behavior of another couple.  Ultimately, the imposing authority agreed and found the accused not Guilty.

Result: No rank reduction; restricted filing; only issued 45 days of extra-duty

The accused, a SGT, faced a field grade article 15 for fraternization, drunk and disorderly conduct, and assault of an Army MSG.  Despite being found guilty of punching and biting the E8, and despite not remembering anything due to alcohol intoxication, Attorney Barry collected additional evidence demonstrating that the accused was trying to protect a junior enlisted female Soldier from men who were harassing her.  The accused remains and NCO and has no adverse information in the performance section of his AMHRR.

Result: The Commanding General found the accused Not Guilty of all charges.

The accused, a 1LT, received a General Officer Article 15 for the alleged wrongful use of THC-8. Attorney Willard reviewed the evidence related to the accused’s case and assisted the accused with his response to the allegation. Attorney Willard also prepared a legal response and helped the accused collect numerous witness statements and other evidence for the second reading. During the second reading, the Commanding General found the accused Not Guilty. The accused continues to serve with no adverse action in his record.

Result: Not Guilty of half of the charges; rank punishment suspended; filed in restricted section of AMHRR

The accused, a SSG, received an Article 15 for assaulting two subordinates. Attorney Barry collected additional evidence and drafted the accused's response to the allegations. Attorney Barry also prepared the accused to advocate for himself at the second reading.  Ultimately, he was found Not Guilty of half of the charges, his rank reduction was suspended (which means he remains an E6), and the Article 15 was filed in the restricted section of his AMHRR.

Result: The Command found the accused guilty, but only issued minor punishment and did not initiate administrative separation due to the significant extenuating and mitigating circumstances involved in the accused’s case.

The accused, a senior NCO, received an Article 15 for an allegation of deserting his unit for a period of over four months. Attorney Willard thoroughly reviewed the case and investigated the accused’s background, as well as his lengthy and meritorious service record. Attorney Willard successfully assisted the accused with his response and further helped the accused present proper matters in extenuation and mitigation during the second reading. At his Article 15 hearing, the Command properly found the accused guilty of the sole offense in his case but only issued minor punishment. The Command also ensured that the accused received appropriate medical treatment and did not pursue administrative separation action. The accused continues to serve and never faced administrative separation.

Result: The Command found the accused Not Guilty of all charges.

The accused, a SSG, received an Article 15 for the alleged maltreatment, abusive sexual contact, and physical assault of a Junior Enlisted Soldier in the unit. Attorney Willard reviewed the evidence in the case and thoroughly investigated the alleged victim’s accusations.  Attorney Willard successfully assisted the accused with his response to the allegations and helped the accused collect numerous witness statements and other evidence for the second reading.  At the second reading, the Command considered the accused’s response matters to the allegations and found him Not Guilty of all charges.  The accused continues to serve with no adverse action in his record.

Result: Not Guilty of 1/3 charges; only a reprimand issued; filed in the restricted section of AMHRR

The accused, an Army LTC, received an Article 15 for several failures to report and violation of a lawful regulation.  Attorney Barry collected additional evidence and drafted the accused's matters.  Ultimately, she was found Not Guilty of 1/3 charges and only received a reprimand.  The Article 15 was also filed in the accused's restricted section of her AMHRR.

Result: The command found the Soldier Not Guilty of the reckless endangerment charge and issued the Soldier extra duty.

The accused, a PFC, received an Article 15 for an allegation of reckless endangerment and underage drinking. Attorney Willard assisted the accused by thoroughly reviewing the evidence, researching the reckless endangerment charge, and helping the accused with his response and preparation for the second reading.  During the second reading, the command found the accused Not Guilty of the reckless endangerment charge and issued him extra duty for the underage drinking charge.  The command allowed the accused to continue service without further adverse action.

Result: The accused only received 45 days of extra duty and no other punishment

The accused, a SFC, received a FG Article 15 for alleged use of cocaine and for failing to follow a lawful order from his chain of command. Attorney Willard thoroughly worked with the accused to prepare his response and fully prepare the accused for his second reading, resulting in the accused only receiving 45 days of extra duty without further punishment despite the serious allegations in the case.

Result: No rank taken; restricted filing

The accused, an Army E5, faced a field grade article 15 for driving while intoxicated. Attorney Barry prepared the accused's matters, focusing on the mitigating circumstances to the incident itself as well as the accused's potential.  The imposing authority did not take the accused's rank and filed the article 15 in the restricted section of his AMHRR, minimizing the impact on the accused's career.

Result: Not Guilty of drunk and disorderly conduct and a failure to report; restricted filing

The accused, an Army E5, faced a field grade article 15 for multiple failures to report, violating a lawful order, being incapacitated for work, and drunk and disorderly conduct. Attorney Barry collected additional statements and evidence and drafted the accused's rebuttal matters, demonstrating numerous extenuating and mitigating facts.  She was acquitted of a failure to report and the drunk and disorderly conduct charge.  While the accused did lose rank, her Article 15 was filed in her restricted section and she received no other punishment (forfeiture of pay was suspended). Furthermore, her Command agreed to give her a second chance and did not initiate separation, something that was likely before her matters were considered.

Result: Not Guilty of Half of the Allegations. Filed in the Restricted Section.  Extra Duty

The accused, an Army Special Forces SFC, faced a Field Grade Article 15 for not reporting a fellow team-member's arrest and for violating curfew. Attorney Barry assisted the accused with his rebuttal, gathering additional evidence and making a legal argument regarding what is, and is not, a punitive policy. Ultimately, the accused was found Not Guilty for not reporting his fellow team-member's arrest because the CCIR policy was not punitive. The Article 15 was filed in the restricted section of the Accused's OMPF and he received minimal extra-duty.

Result: No punishment

The accused, an Army SPC, faced an Article 15 for engaging in a sexual relationship with a SSG and for making a false official statement relating to her BAH.  Attorney Barry drafted the accused's matters for her, resulting in her Battalion Commander issuing no punishment and allowing her to continue to serve at her current rank.

Result: Not Guilty of 5 out of 12 of the Accusations; Reduction in Rank; Accused allowed to Continue to Serve

The accused, an Army SGT, faced a field grade Article 15 from his Battalion Commander for sexually harassing his subordinates, physically abusing his subordinates, and for making racist and sexist comments. Attorney Barry assisted the accused with his written rebuttal. Despite the serious accusations, the accused's Battalion Commander found him Not Guilty of five specifications, only reduced him in rank, and allowed him to continue to serve.

Result: The Command found the Soldier Not Guilty of the assault charge, issued him a reprimand, and filed the Article 15 in the accused’s local file

The accused, a SSG, received an Article 15 for allegedly assaulting a Junior Enlisted Soldier and fraternizing with her by having an inappropriate relationship. Attorney Willard assisted the accused during the investigation, thoroughly reviewed the evidence against the accused, and successfully the accused with his response and preparation for the second reading.  During the second reading, the command found the accused Not Guilty of the assault charge and only issued him a reprimand for the perception of having an inappropriate relationship with a Junior Soldier.  The command also filed the Article 15 in the accused’s restricted file, and the accused was allowed to continue service without further adverse action.

Result: The Command withdrew the Article 15

The accused, a SSgt, received an Article 15 for allegedly disobeying an order from his command to remove inappropriate material from his online social media account. Attorney Willard reviewed the evidence in the case and successfully assisted the accused with his response and preparation for the second reading.  At the second reading, the command considered the accused’s written response matters regarding the allegation, and the command ultimately elected to withdraw the Article 15.

Result: Not Guilty of Maltreatment

The accused, an Army Master Sergeant, faced a Field Grade Article 15 for for the appearance of an inappropriate relationship and maltreatment. Attorney Barry put together a lengthy rebuttal for the accused, including video and text messages with the alleged victim.  Ultimately, the imposing Commander found the accused Not Guilty of the more serious allegation (Maltreatment).  The accused only received forfeitures of half-months pay for two months.

Result: The accused was found Not Guilty

The accused, an Army Staff Sergeant, faced a Field Grade Article 15 for Domestic Violence and Disorderly Conduct. Attorney Barry gathered additional evidence, including a statement from the alleged victim, and wrote a detailed legal analysis for the imposing Commander.  Ultimately, the Commander agreed with Attorney Barry and found the accused Not Guilty of all charges.

Result: The accused was found Not Guilty of half of the allegations, only lost half of one-months pay for one-month, and did not get separated 

The accused, an Army Officer, faced a General-Officer Article 15 for two alleged inappropriate relationships with different NCOs.  Attorney Barry assisted the accused in gathering additional evidence, resulting in the accused being found Not Guilty of half of the allegations.  Attorney Barry also presented sufficient mitigating and extenuating circumstances, resulting in minimal punishment and no initiation of elimination.  The accused left the Military Honorably with an unqualified resignation.

Result: The accused received only extra duty and all other punishment suspended for an allegation of wrongful drug use

Attorney Willard assisted the accused by providing a legal response to the allegation and successfully prepared the him for the second reading in his case regarding the alleged illegal drug use. The accused only received 45 days extra duty and all other punishment suspended. The accused was able to keep his rank and pay, thereby limiting the potential impacts on his career.

Result: Not Guilty of one of the inappropriate relationships; only pay forfeiture adjudged as punishment

The accused, a Command Sergeant Major, was accused of having two inappropriate relationships within his unit.  Attorney Barry advised the accused during the investigation and ultimately drafted his response to the General Officer Article 15.  The accused was only found Guilty of one of the inappropriate relationships, which he plead Guilty to.  Only 1/2 of 1 months pay was adjudged as a forfeiture, and the accused was allowed to retire in his current rank/grade.

Result: No rank reduction; no loss of pay; filed in restricted section of OMPF

The accused, a SSG, received an Article 15 for allegedly having an inappropriate relationship with the wife of another servicemember from his unit. Attorney Willard successfully assisted the accused in his response and preparation for his second reading, resulting in only 40 days of extra duty and restriction (no loss of pay or rank reduction) and the Article 15 being filed in the restricted section of his OMPF, therefore limiting potential impacts on the SSG’s career

Result: Not Guilty

The accused, a junior enlisted Soldier, faced an Article 15 for alleged drug use after testing positive during a urinalysis.  Attorney Barry collected evidence and provided legal analysis to the imposing Commander, ultimately convincing him that the accused "innocently ingested" the illegal substance.  The accused was found Not Guilty and was allowed to continue to serve.

Result: Filed in Restricted File; no loss of pay; no loss of rank (punishment suspended)

The accused, a SSG, received an Article 15 for allegedly falsifying Soldiers' personnel documents, falsifying command signatures, and impersonating the commander and first sergeant.  Attorney Willard assisted the accused in his response and in preparing for his second reading, resulting in a suspended rank reduction and the Article 15 being filed in the restricted section of his OMPF, therefore limiting the impacts on the SSG's career.

Result: Filed in the restricted file

The accused, a SFC, received an Article 15 for allegedly making multiple inappropriate comments to junior enlisted Soldiers while he was a platoon sergeant.   Attorney Barry assisted the accused in his response and in preparing for his second-reading, resulting in the Article 15 being filed in the restricted section of his OMPF, therefore limiting the impacts on his career.

Result: Not Guilty

The accused faced a field grade article 15 for drug distribution and possession.  Attorney Barry assisted the accused by preparing him a written response, gathering letters of support, and coaching him through the second reading.  He was found Not Guilty and was allowed to continue his military career.

Result: All punishment suspended; Article 15 filed in Restricted File

The accused, a SSG, was facing an Article 15 for extramarital sexual conduct with a fellow SSG's wife in the same unit.  Attorney Barry prepared the accused's matters for his second reading, effectively convincing the Battalion Commander to only administer 45 days of extra duty (all suspended) and to file the Article 15 in the accused's restricted file.  The accused lost no rank and QMP will likely not be triggered because of the restricted filing.

Result: All punishment suspended: Not Guilty of adultery; minimal punishment issued

The accused was initially under investigation for rape.  Attorney Barry advised the accused during the investigation and prepared his response for the second reading of the Article 15.  Ultimately, the accused was cleared of all charges except underaged drinking, which he admitted to from the very beginning.   The accused was allowed to continue his military career.

Result: Not Guilty of making a false official statement; minimal punishment issued

The accused, an officer, previously admitted to violating GO 1 and to having an inappropriate relationship.  Attorney Barry assisted the accused in advocating for his innocence regarding the false official statement.  Ultimately, the Commanding General agreed and acquitted the accused on this charge.

Result: Not Guilty of Assault, only received a reprimand

The accused was an officer alleged to have assaulted a female shuttle driver after a night of drinking.  Attorney Barry effectively advocated to the General imposing the article 15, convincing him that the officer in question was not guilty of assault.  The accused only received a reprimand.

Result: Not Guilty, no punishment.

Attorney Barry advocated to his Battalion Commander and then prepared his subsequent appeal to the Brigade Commander, demonstrating that the accused had no knowledge of the marijuana in his car and therefore was not guilty.

Result: Article 15 thrown out, the accused changed units and duty stations.

Attorney Barry successfully demonstrated that the accused was being bullied by his NCOs and was actually sexually assaulted by one of them. Attorney Barry made the chain of command aware of these facts and convinced them to discard the Article 15 out of fairness to the accused.

Result: Not Guilty, no punishment.

Attorney Barry advocated to the accused’s Brigade Commander by going to the police station and photographing the incredibly small amount of marijuana that was found. Attorney Barry pointed out that it would be impossible for anyone to know that small amount was in the vehicle the accused was driving. He also demonstrated that another individual had admitted to smoking marijuana in the vehicle that the accused was driving.

Result: No charges brought, no punishment, no discharge.

Attorney Barry examined all of the evidence against the accused and determined that she was being falsely accused and framed by a disgruntled Soldier. The accused turned down the Article 15 and demanded trial by Court Martial.

Result: Article 15 thrown out, no punishment.

The accused was found guilty at the original Article 15 proceeding. Attorney Barry prepared an appeal for the Battalion Commander demonstrating that punishing the accused was unjust. The Battalion Commander agreed.

Result: Not Guilty, no punishment.

Attorney Barry gathered evidence and witnesses on the accused’s behalf and advocated to his Battalion Commander. He also gathered enough evidence to demonstrate that the complaining witness was lying and that the accused and his wife were the only reliable witnesses.