Domestic Violence Military Defense Lawyer, Child Abuse Military Defense Lawyer, Assault Military Defense Lawyer, and Maiming Military Defense Lawyer

Military allegations of domestic violence, child abuse, assault, and/or maiming can have devastating legal, professional, personal and family consequences for military members accused of these offenses.

Civilian defense attorney Richard V. Stevens has extensive experience representing and defending military members accused of domestic violence, child abuse and/or assault in the military justice system. Attorney Stevens is a civilian court-martial defense lawyer and military defense lawyer. He began handling military cases in 1995 and he has been handling military cases for over 30 years. As a former active duty JAG lawyer, Richard V. Stevens has defended numerous different alleged domestic violence, child abuse, and assault scenarios over the past three decades of his legal practice. Domestic violence, child abuse, and assault cases are, in fact, some of the most common types of military cases he handles either in court-martial trials, discharge board or separation board hearings, Article 15 (nonjudicial punishment, NJP) presentations, and other military adverse actions.

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE (INTIMATE PARTNER VIOLENCE) ALLEGATIONS IN THE MILITARY JUSTICE SYSTEM (UCMJ Article 128b):

A special category of alleged assault cases in the military justice system are domestic violence or intimate partner violence cases. In these cases, which are charged under UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice) Article 128b, the military member is accused of victimizing a spouse, intimate partner, or immediate family member. The alleged offenses included under military domestic violence charging are:

– Physical assaults,
– Threats of violence,
– Violations of protective orders or military no-contact orders, and,
– Strangulation or suffocation.

These cases can be very contentious and filled with emotion and anger. Often, the complaining witness has motives against the military member that are exposed through strategies used by the defense. These cases also often involve a parallel case within the civilian legal community, often in family court, such as a divorce case and/or a child custody case.

ASSAULT ALLEGATIONS IN THE MILITARY JUSTICE SYSTEM (UCMJ Article 128):

Assault allegations in the military justice system can arise in different scenarios. In military sexual assault cases, there are also often accompanying allegations of assault, in violation of UCMJ Article 128. In domestic discord cases, there are also often allegations of assault. With or without an associated sexual assault allegation or domestic discord, Attorney Richard V. Stevens has often handled military cases in which he has to defend his clients against claims of assault. This could be in the context of a bar fight, dorm/barracks fight, confrontation on duty, or many other scenarios of alleged fights or “unwanted touchings.”

Under UCMJ Article 128, a military assault charge could include:

– Assault or simple assault,
– Aggravated assault,
– Assault with intent to commit another offense,
– Assault consummated by a battery,
– Assault on a commissioned officer,
– Assault on a sentinel or lookout, and
– Assault consummated by a battery on a child under 16 years old.

SELF DEFENSE AND DEFENSE OF ANOTHER:

In some military assault cases, the defenses of self defense or defense of another may be raised.

Self Defense:

To raise the defense of self defense in a military case alleging assault, the accused must have had a reasonable belief that bodily harm was about to be inflicted on himself/herself. This is judged through the test of whether, under the same facts and circumstances, any reasonably prudent person, faced with the same situation, would have believed that he/she would immediately be physically harmed. Not only is objective reasonableness considered, but so are the comparative size and strength of the individuals and whether safe retreat was possible. In addition to a reasonable belief of immediate harm, to raise this defense the accused must also have actually believed the amount of force he/she used was required to protect himself/herself. The accused is not required to use the same amount or kind of force as the attacker; however, the accused may not use force which is unreasonable in the circumstances.

Defense of Another:

To raise the defense of defense of another in military assault cases, the accused must have had a reasonable belief that bodily harm was about to be inflicted on the person he/she was defending. This is judged through the test of whether, under the same facts and circumstances, a reasonably prudent person, faced with the same situation, would have believed that bodily harm was about to be inflicted. Not only is reasonable belief required, but the accused must also have actually believed that the amount of force he/she used was necessary to protect against bodily harm. In defending another person, the accused is not required to use the same type or amount of force used by the attacker, but the accused cannot use force which is unreasonable in the circumstances.

(PHYSICAL) CHILD ABUSE ALLEGATIONS IN THE MILITARY JUSTICE SYSTEM (UCMJ Article 128):

Another special category of assault allegations within the military justice system are (physical) child abuse allegations. In these cases, the military alleges that (usually) a parent or guardian has physically assaulted a child under the age of 16 years old. These can be complicated cases, involving medical experts and psychological experts. Attorney Richard V. Stevens has handled many alleged child abuse cases within the military justice system. Some of these cases have involved bruising, broken bones, and alleged violent shaking. These cases also involve attorney questioning of young children on the witness stand, after they have undergone questioning by other professionals, such as forensic child interviews conducted during the investigation. These cases can also involve the parental discipline defense.

The Parental Discipline Defense:

The parental discipline defense is an affirmative defense in a military case alleging child abuse. This defense allows a parent to use corporal (physical) punishment as a disciplinary measure based on parental authority, which includes the right to discipline a child. The corporal punishment must be for the purpose of safeguarding or promoting the welfare of the child, including the prevention or punishment of the child’s misconduct, and the force used may not be unreasonable or excessive. Unreasonable or excessive force is that force designed to cause, or known to create, a substantial risk of causing death, serious bodily injury, disfigurement, extreme pain, extreme mental distress, or gross degradation. In determining this issue, the factfinder must consider all the relevant facts and circumstances including, but not limited to:

– The amount of force used,
– The instrument used,
– Where upon the body the force or instrument was applied,
– The number of times and manner the force or instrument was used,
– The age and size of the child, and,
– The size of the accused.

In these cases, it is the prosecution’s burden of proof to establish the guilt of the accused not only regarding the elements for the assault allegation(s), but also to disprove the issue of parental discipline. In order to find the accused guilty of the offense(s), the factfinder must be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused’s act(s) were not within the authority of parental discipline, or that the force used was unreasonable or excessive.

MAIMING ALLEGATIONS IN THE MILITARY JUSTICE SYSTEM (UCMJ Article 128a)

Maiming allegations in the military cover the following: A military member who, with intent to injure, disfigure, or disable, inflicts upon the person of another an injury which —
(1) seriously disfigures his person by any mutilation thereof;
(2) destroys or disables any member or organ of his body; or
(3) seriously diminishes his physical vigor by the injury of any member or organ.

The MCM description of this offense goes on to explain that maiming requires a specific intent to injure generally but not a specific intent to maim. Thus, one commits the offense who intends only a slight injury, if in fact there is infliction of an injury of the type specified in this article. Infliction of the type of injuries specified in this article upon the person of another may support an inference of the intent to injure, disfigure, or disable. The description includes examples of maiming, such as: It is maiming to put out a person’s eye, to cut off a hand, foot, or finger, or to knock out a tooth, as these injuries destroy or disable those members or organs. It is also maiming to injure an internal organ so as to seriously diminish the physical vigor of a person. Likewise, it is maiming to cut off an ear or to scar a face with acid, as these injuries seriously disfigure a person. A disfigurement need not mutilate any entire member to come within the article, or be of any particular type, but must be such as to impair perceptibly and materially the victim’s comeliness. The disfigurement, diminishment of vigor, or destruction or disablement of any member or organ must be a serious injury of a substantially permanent nature. However, the offense is complete if such an injury is inflicted even though there is a possibility that the victim may eventually recover the use of the member or organ, or that the disfigurement may be cured by surgery.

Basically, a maiming allegation is on the extreme end of the spectrum of alleged assaults. It is a very serious offense.

Handling the serious military cases described above requires the expertise of a skilled military defense lawyer. A military member accused of these offenses could face extreme jeopardy – possible federal criminal conviction, lengthy jail terms, dishonorable discharge or dismissal, and a variety of other legal, professional, personal, and family consequences.

An experienced and aggressive defense attorney is absolutely vital in these military cases.

Civilian court-martial defense attorney Richard V. Stevens is a civilian criminal defense attorney and former active duty military JAG lawyer who exclusively practices military law and defends military members stationed around the world who are facing military trials, discipline and investigations. If you’re facing military allegations regarding computer crimes and pornography, don’t hesitate to seek the legal help you’re going to need. For a free initial case consultation, please contact us.

No attorney can guarantee the outcome you seek in your military case. What we can promise is that we will apply our decades of experience to the defense of your military case. This includes our extensive experience in military law, military regulations, military investigations, military disciplinary actions, military adverse actions, and/or military court-martial trials and cases.

Client Testimonials and Reviews

Please see Client Testimonials and Client Reviews for Attorney Richard V. Stevens.

Law Firm Social Media Accounts

Please find updates on our law firm and our cases on our social media:
Our Blog
Successful Case Defenses Through 2025
Twitter X
Facebook
Instagram