Court-Martial Trial Practice

Article 120, UCMJ, and Firearms
Philip D. Cave

18 U.S.C. § 922, part of the Gun Control Act of 1968, is one of the most important federal statutes regulating firearms and ammunition in the United States. It delineates specific prohibitions on the possession, sale, transfer, shipment, and receipt of firearms and ammunition under various circumstances. The statute aims to keep firearms out of…

Continue reading ›
Article 120, UCMJ, and Mendoza
Philip D. Cave

United States v. Mendoza, No. 23‑0210 (C.A.A.F. Oct. 7, 2024), along with a review of the historical evolution of Article 120, UCMJ. The Air Force is now challenging four decisions of the Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals (AFCCA) before the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF) because they disagree with AFCCA setting…

Continue reading ›
Third party consent to searches in the military under the UCMJ
Philip D. Cave

A recent case from the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF) highlights the ongoing problem of third-party consent to search of you property. For example, your wife consents. United States v. Brinkman‑Coronel, Docket No. 24‑0159 (C.A.A.F. May 28, 2025) U.S. Courts – Armed Forces+1Justia Law+1, with historical context on recusal and consent-search doctrine…

Continue reading ›
Gun possession after court-martial
Philip D. Cave

If you are convicted of certain offenses or a sentenced to a dishonorable discharge, you may lose your right to own, possess, use, and buy a firearm. Your military defense lawyer can tell about the effects of those convictions under the UCMJ. United States v. Johnson, No. 24‑0004 (C.A.A.F. 2025), along with broader context on…

Continue reading ›
Batson and members challenges
Philip D. Cave

United States v. Thomas, Docket No. 24‑0147 (C.A.A.F. June 2025). Batson challenges are relatively rare in courts-martial, and that’s something your military defense counsel should know about. Thomas is a recent example of how such a challenge should be conducted and evaluated. The history of Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986), in courts-martial reflects…

Continue reading ›
You have rights
Philip D. Cave

Military defense counsel advised a client in trouble under the UCMJ will know about the right to silence and counsel. 1. Fifth Amendment Rights & Article 31, UCMJ — Overview Fifth Amendment Article 31, UCMJ 2. Summary of United States v. Reimonenq (USCG CCA, June 2025) A Coast Guard sailor, Damage Controlman Third Class Reimonenq,…

Continue reading ›
Access to psych records
Philip D. Cave

United States v. Mellette. Your military defense counsel needs to know about and understand this case. 1. Background and Prior History 2. Navy-Marine Corps CCA Decision (May 14, 2021) 3. CAAF Review and Remand Thus, the matter was remanded for further proceedings to assess the level of privilege, appropriate waiver, and prejudice armfor.uscourts.gov+3Department of Justice+3armfor.uscourts.gov+3.…

Continue reading ›
Virtual pornography
Philip D. Cave

Case Summary and Analysis: United States v. Forney, 67 M.J. 271 (C.A.A.F. 2009), that your military defense lawyer should consider. The Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces is about to get the case of United States v. Rocha, to consider private conduct which may or may not offend. I. Background and Procedural History Lieutenant…

Continue reading ›
Gambling–UCMJ
Philip D. Cave

There are new reports that gambling by servicemembers is becoming a significant problem. Patty Nieberg, Gambling addiction in the military may be going unnoticed, advocates warn. Task & Purpose, 3 July 2025. Gambling is not per se criminalized under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), but it can be punished under several punitive articles…

Continue reading ›
You get what you ask for — Article 32s
Philip D. Cave

For those who practiced under the “old” Article 32, UCMJ, it was considered an important stage in whether a person would be prosecuted at a general court-martial. Any military defense counsel who practiced before 2020, they would remember what the original Court of Military Appeals (CMA) (the name has since been changed to U.S. Court…

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