Nonjudicial Punishment Case Results

Our Case Results

Below are summaries of cases that Attorneys Barry and Willard have worked on. Results cannot be guaranteed and each case’s results depend on its specific facts and circumstances. Contact us today for a free case consultation on your specific case!

Nonjudicial Punishment Case Results

September 2022: The accused faced a Field Grade Article 15 for not reporting an arrest and breaking curfew

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.

August 2022: The accused faced an Article 15 for engaging in a sexual relationship with an E6 and for a false official statement

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.

August 2022: The accused faced an Article 15 for sexually harassing his subordinates, physically abusing his subordinates, and making racist/sexist comments

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.

July 2022: The accused faced an Article 15 for allegations that he fraternized and had an inappropriate relationship with a Junior Enlisted Soldier, and that he physically assaulted that Soldier.

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.

July 2022: The accused faced an Article 15 for an allegation that he failed to obey a lawful order from the command to remove inappropriate material from the accused’s online social media account.

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.

July 2022: The accused faced a Field Grade Article 15 for the appearance of an inappropriate relationship and maltreatment

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.

June 2022: The accused faced a Field Grade Article 15 for Domestic Violence and Disorderly Conduct

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.

May 2022: The accused faced a General Officer Article 15 for Two Inappropriate Relationships

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.

March 2022: The accused faced an Article 15 for an allegation of wrongful drug use

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.

November 2021: The accused faced a General Officer Article 15 for allegations of two inappropriate relationships

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.

October 2021: The accused faced a Field Grade Article 15 for allegations of an improper relationship with another Soldier's spouse

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

August 2021: The accused faced a field grade Article 15 for alleged drug use

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.

August 2021: The accused faced a Field Grade Article 15 for allegations of falsifying personnel documents, falsifying command signatures to get promoted, and impersonating the command team

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.

August 2021: The accused faced a field grade Article 15 for allegedly making multiple inappropriate comments

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.

July 2021: The accused faced a field grade article 15 for drug distribution and possession

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.

July 2021: The accused faced a field grade article 15 for extramarital sexual conduct

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.

October 2020: The accused faced a field grade article 15 for underaged drinking and adultery

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.

July 2020: the accused was facing a general officer article 15 for a prohibited relationship, a GO 1 violation, and making a false official statement

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.

April 2020: the accused was given an article 15 for alleged assault, drunk and disorderly conduct, and conduct unbecoming

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.

March 2019: The accused was given an Article 15 for allegedly possessing marijuana as he drove onto the installation.

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.

November 2018: The accused was given an Article 15 for allegedly disobeying and threatening his NCOs.

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.

September 2018: The accused was given an Article 15 for allegedly possessing marijuana that was found in his car as he drove onto the installation.

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.

September 2018: The accused was given an Article 15 for allegedly having an inappropriate relationship with a fellow NCO.

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.

August 2018: The accused was given an Article 15 for two failures to report that happened 9 months earlier.

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.

June 2018: The accused was given an Article 15 for allegedly committing a sexual assault.

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.

April 2018: The accused was given an Article 15 for alleged mistreatment of his subordinates.

Result: Article 15 filed in the accused’s restricted file, accused allowed to continue to serve.

Attorney Barry advised the accused throughout the 15-6 investigation and subsequent Article 15. Attorney Barry gathered evidence and prepared a response for the accused. He also met with the accused’s Battalion Commander and advocated on his behalf prior to the Article 15.