Court-Martial Trial Practice

Civilian arrest and court-martial?
Philip D. Cave

Navy Times tells us that “A Florida-based U.S. Navy command master chief was relieved from his leadership position at Naval Ordnance Test Unit last month, according to officials.” While it appears, the case is proceeding within the state legal system, there’s a possibility it becomes a military justice issue (and certainly an adverse administrative issue).…

Continue reading ›
Military Judge recusal
Philip D. Cave

Motions to recuse a military judge or sua sponte recusal are becoming more frequent in military justice. We have the “Spath Issue,” the now “Keane Issue,” both from the Commissions. I and several others are litigating appeals based on one military judge in the Army. Each of the cases relate to disclosure of information so…

Continue reading ›
The Supremes are back to public work
Philip D. Cave

With the start of the new season the Supremes have issued its first Orders List comprising five pages-worth–mostly denials. An observer poindts to, In Kaur v. Maryland, No. 19–1045, Justice Sotomayor’s 5-page statement begins and ends this way: Although I join the Court’s decision to deny certiorari, I write separately to address a concerning feature…

Continue reading ›
Fort Hood
Philip D. Cave

A veteran’s group is planning to meet at Austin City Hall Thursday afternoon for what it is calling a public trial of Fort Hood leadership over the recent deaths of U.S. Army Spc. Vanessa Guillen and other soldiers stationed at the military base. The group, Vets for the People, is part of the Working Families…

Continue reading ›
Trial-Social Media Instructions
Philip D. Cave

A federal Judiciary committee has issued a new set of model jury instructions (pdf) that federal judges may use to deter jurors from using social media to research or communicate about cases. The new instructions, which update and expand on a similar version issued in 2012, were sent to federal judges on Sept. 1. The…

Continue reading ›
9th Circuit reverses a conviction based on prosecutor’s closing argument.
Philip D. Cave

In Ford v. Perry, the court set aside a conviction based on improper comments of the prosecutor during closing argument. During closing arguments, Ford’s lawyer offered a classic criminal defense that contradictions of witnesses and doubt over the identity of the shooter meant that the presumption of innocence had not been satisfied. The prosecutor then…

Continue reading ›
Lorance
Philip D. Cave

Nathaniel Penn gives us a piece of investigative journalism in his new article on Army 1st LT Clint Lorance. This is the sordid saga of a LT whose actions wreaked havoc on those within his platoon, whom a panel (jury) of Army Soldiers convicted of murder, and whom President Trump later pardoned after Fox News…

Continue reading ›

Client Reviews

Many years after retiring from the USN, I suddenly found myself in a very unwelcome legal matter with the Navy. It was a total shock and I was very concerned as to the impact this would have on me and my...

Rob

I was facing accusations that would not only ruin my career but my life. When I hired Mr. Freeburg, he gave me the hope that everything would be turn out great. He put a great team together along with my...

Air Force Anonymous

Phil Cave has helped me through NJP and restoration of my security clearance. He even came to visit me in Spain. I never thought I would work again and he certainly through with advise and guidance that we're...

Bryan

Mr. Nathan Freeburg fought and won a war for me. A war where my life was on the line. The week of trial was extremely long but he never seemed like he was tired. The prosecution were getting whittled down each...

Navy Anonymous

Mr. Cave saved my military retirement! His promise to me from day one was that he would fight as hard as he could he right the wring that had been done to me. And he did! I am so very thankful and grateful to...

Crystal

Mr. Freeburg is passionate about justice and upholding the law and dignity of the court. He is brave and bold in his ability to represent his clients amidst the attempted intimidation and procedural pressure...

Navy Represented

The Army and prosecution was pushing for me to take a Chapter 10. But Mr. Freeburg made me confident we could win. We went to trial and he crushed them in cross examination and he saved my career.

Vince

Contact Us

  1. 1 Free Consultation
  2. 2 Over 40 Years of Experience
  3. 3 Dedicated to Military Law
Fill out the contact form or call us at 703-298-9562 to schedule your free consultation.

Leave Us a Message