Case Results

REAL COURTS-MARTIAL RESULTS

Below are real cases that we have defended. However, all cases are different. A success in one case does not guarantee success in another similar case. We do not guarantee a certain outcome, to do so violates the Rules of Professional Responsibility. In addition, the results of the case often depend on the facts, whether the client follows legal advice and the stage of the proceeding at which services are retained.

2024 Case Results

U.S. v. O-5, United States Army, Fort McNair, Washington, D.C. 

An Army Lieutenant Colonel is accused by his Lieutenant Colonel ex-wife of domestic violence in the midst of a custody dispute.  Cave & Freeburg, LLP, is retained and Mr. Nathan Freeburg undertakes an extensive investigation and pretrial litigation practice to shape the trial.  Finally, at a General Court-Martial, Mr. Freeburg uses thorough cross-examinations of the alleged victim and the responding paramedics and law enforcement in front of a very senior Army officer panel and finally the client is acquitted!

Result: Full Acquittal on All Charges.  No Federal Conviction, No Dismissal, Retirement Preserved.

U.S. v. O-4, Quantico Marine Corps Base, Virginia.

A Marine Major is accused of communicating threats, strangulation and other acts of alleged domestic violence.  After a long investigation, the client’s retirement is put on hold and court-martial charges are preferred against him.  Cave & Freeburg, LLP is retained and Mr. Freeburg investigates the case before the Article 32 preliminary hearing.  At the hearing, Mr. Freeburg argues both against probable cause for some of the charges and against prosecuting the case considering the interests of all involved.  Eventually, the Marine Corps dismisses the court-martial charges!

Result: Charges Dismissed.  No Federal Conviction, No Dismissal, Retirement Preserved.

U.S. v. E-4, Fort Drum, New York. 

An Army Corporal is accused by another Soldier of sexually assaulting her in her barracks room.  Mr. Freeburg investigates the case in preparation for the preferral of charges even though it is clear the allegation was made out of revenge as the alleged victim had an ongoing relationship with the client.  Eventually, the Army dismisses the case, the Soldier is retained at a board and then reaches his ETS with an honorable discharge!

Result: Honorable Discharge.  No Federal Conviction, No Sex Offender Registration, No Dishonorable Discharge.

U.S. v. E-5, United States Air Force, Hulbert Field, Florida.

An Air Force Staff Sergeant is accused of the possession of child pornography and several misdemeanor level charges, facing fifteen years in prison. The airman retains Cave & Freeburg for the court-martial charges. At trial, Mr. Freeburg was able to show through cross-examination of the government’s digital forensic experts that there was not evidence of knowing possession of child pornography. Consequently, an enlisted panel acquitted the airman of the possession of child pornography and only convicted him of grabbing aperson’s wrists and destroying a phone. He was sentenced to be reduced from E-5 to E-4 and twenty days of confinement.

Result: Not Guilty of All Child Pornography Charges, No Sex Offender Registration, No Punitive Discharge.

2023 Case Results

U.S. v. E-7, United States Marine Corps, Quantico Marine Corps Base, Virginia. 

A Gunnery Sergeant is accused of making five false official statements about his relationship with a foreign national.  Cave & Freeburg, LLP, is retained and Mr. Freeburg investigates the case and files several successful motions to produce necessary witnesses and shape the trial.  At trial, Mr. Freeburg makes strong points for innocence through cross examination of the government witnesses, calls a variety of character witnesses to talk about the GySgt’s stellar career and then wraps up the defense in closing argument.  The panel only takes forty-five minutes to issue a Not Guilty verdict!

Result: Not Guilty of All Charges, No Federal Conviction, No Punitive Discharge, Retirement Preserved.

An Air Force Senior Master Sergeant is accused of indecently exposing his genitalia to a front desk clerk at the hotel on an air force base.  Cave & Freeburg, LLP, is retained and Mr. Freeburg investigates the case and files several successful motions to produce necessary witnesses and shape the trial.  At trial,  Mr. Freeburg is able to use cross-examination and strong testimony from the Senior Master Sergeant himself to rebut the government’s case in front of the military panel and achieve a very quick Not Guilty verdict!

Result: Not Guilty of All Charges, No Federal Conviction, No Sex Offender Registration, No Punitive Discharge, Retirement Preserved.

U.S. v. O-3, United States Coast Guard, Washington, District of Columbia. 

Coast Guard Lieutenant is accused of multiple orders violations for statements made on internal communications.  General court-martial charges are preferred and the officer retains Cave & Freeburg, LLP.  Mr. Freeburg investigates the case and negotiates with the Coast Guard prosecutors.  As a result of the negotiations, the Coast Guard agrees to a resignation with a general under honorable conditions characterization instead of a court-martial.

Result: No Federal Conviction, No Confinement, No Dishonorable Discharge.

U.S. v. E-6, United States Army, Fort McNair, Washington, District of Columbia  

Staff Sergeant is accused of the possession of child pornography by his estranged ex-girlfriend.  His computers and phones are seized by the government and general court-martial charges are preferred.  After the Soldier retains Cave & Freeburg, LLP,  Mr. Freeburg investigates and litigates the case.  As Mr. Freeburg continues to shape the case with witnesses and motions, the Army agrees to a separation instead of a court-martial!

Result: No Federal Conviction, No Confinement, No Dishonorable Discharge.

U.S. v. E-4, United States Army, Fort Bragg, North Carolina. 

Soldier is accused of strangling and assaulting another Soldier with which he had a tempestuous romantic relationship.  General court-martial charges are preferred and the Soldier retains Cave & Freeburg, LLP.  Mr. Freeburg investigates and litigates the case.  Less than a week before trial, as Mr. Freeburg continues to shape the case with witnesses and motions, the Army agrees to a separation with a general under honorable conditions characterization instead of a court-martial!

Result: No Federal Conviction, No Confinement, No Dishonorable Discharge.

U.S. v. E-9, United States Army, Fort Bliss, Texas. 

An Army Sergeant Major is accused of a lewd act on a child for allegedly placing his penis on the face of a eleven-year old girl while she was sleeping.  Mr. Nathan Freeburg conducts his own investigation and interviews of witnesses CID had never talked to in advance of the Article 32 hearing.  Even though it was very clear that the allegation was false, the government decided to move forward to trial anyway, due to misunderstanding the DNA evidence.  Although the government had two expert witnesses of its own at trial they shockingly denied the Sergeant Major his own experts in a blatant attempt to deny him a fair trial.  Even worse, the judge bizarrely agreed with the government.  Thankfully, in the most unfair military trial Mr. Freeburg has had, he was able to use cross-examination and strong testimony from the Sergeant Major client himself to rebut the government’s case in front of a senior military panel.

Result: Not Guilty of All Charges, No Federal Conviction, No Sex Offender Registration, No Dishonorable Discharge, Retirement Preserved.

U.S. v. E-5, United States Army, Fort Bragg, North Carolina.

An Army Sergeant is investigated by the states of North Carolina and Florida for allegations that he raped and molested his now teenager daughter at multiple locations. The Army takes the case in order to wrap the allegations into one trial and also charges the Soldier with sexual abuse of his niece and several domestic violence charges. In total, he is charged with three specifications of rape of a child, 6 specifications of sexual abuse of a child, one specification of rape, one specification of sexual assault, two specifications of battery and one specification of domestic violence, facing life in prison! The Soldier retains Cave & Freeburg for the court-martial charges. At trial, Mr. Freeburg was able to show through cross-examination of the accusers and their friends that they had a history of lying and false allegations. In addition, Mr. Freeburg prepared the client to testify honestly and directly and stand up to crossexamination from an Army O-5 Special Victim Prosecutor. Consequently, an enlisted panel acquitted the Soldier of all charges of child rape, rape, sexual abuse and sexual assault and only convicted him of one specification of simple battery! He was sentenced to be reduced from E-5 to E-4 and no other punishment.

Result: Not Guilty of All Child Rape, Rape, Sexual Assault and Sexual Abuse Charges, No Sex Offender Registration, No Dishonorable Discharge, No Confinement.

A Marine is accused by his ex-girlfriend of assaulting her, pointing a gun at her and using indecent language to an Uber driver.  The Marine retains Mr. Freeburg who represents him at the Article 32 hearing and with a strong defense is able to get the pointing the firearm charge dismissed for no probable cause!  Following, the Marines send the case to a special court-martial on the assault and indecent language charges.  At trial, the Marines elect not to call the ex-girlfriend because they believe they can prove the case through other witnesses.  Through cross-examination, Mr. Freeburg shows that the prosecution’s evidence is incredibly weak so they attempt to call the ex-girlfriend as a surprise witness.  Mr. Freeburg moves to exclude her as a witness and instead the judge orders a mistrial (even though the defense was “winning”).  The Marine Corps sends the case to a new trial at which Mr. Freeburg moves to dismiss based upon double jeopardy.  The judge denies the motion so Mr. Cave files an extraordinary writ to appeal the judge’s decision with the Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals.  After deliberating for several months, the Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals grants the defense appeal, meaning the Marine cannot be prosecuted!

Result: Charges Dismissed.  No Federal Conviction, No Punitive Discharge.

U.S. v. E-5, Dyess Air Force Base, Texas.

An Air Force Staff Sergeant is accused by his estranged wife, in the midst of a custody dispute, of sexually assaulting her. Consequently, court-martial charges are preferred against the client and referred to a general court-martial. Mr. Freeburg investigates the case further and presents the government with discovery demand after discovery demand for various employment records showing the alleged victim’s long history of lying and mentally disturbed behavior. Eventually, only five days before trial, the Air Force realizes how dishonest the alleged victim is and dismisses all court-martial charges!

Result: Charges Dismissed. No Federal Conviction, No Sex Offender Registration, No Dishonorable Discharge.

U.S. v. E-4, United States Army, Fort Meade, Maryland.

Soldier is accused of sexual assault and domestic violence with his estranged wife with which he has an ongoing custody dispute. Court-martial charges are preferred and the Soldier retains Cave & Freeburg, LLP. Mr. Freeburg investigates and litigates the case including filing several motions to shape the trial. Shortly before trial, Mr. Freeburg has a digital forensic extraction conducted, finding evidence showing the alleged victim’s own history of lies and violence. As a result, the Army agrees to a separation with a general under honorable conditions characterization instead of a court-martial!

Result: No Federal Conviction, No Sex Offender Registration, No Dishonorable Discharge.

2022 Case Results

U.S. v. E-4, United States Air Force, Grand Forks Air Force Base, North Dakota. 

Senior Airman is accused of groping another Airman on two occasions in the same night while she was sleeping on the couch after a party.  Although she could not identify her assailant, the Air Force preferred charges against the client based upon “evidence” provided by another potential suspect!  Cave & Freeburg, LLP was retained and Mr. Freeburg thoroughly prepared for trial.  At a judge-alone trial, Mr. Freeburg delivered a strong case that another man groped the Airman, resulting in a verdict of “Not Guilty” to all charges and specifications!  

Result: Not Guilty of All Charges, No Federal Conviction, No Sex Offender Registration, No Dishonorable Discharge.

U.S. v. E-5, United States Army, Fort Meade, Maryland. 

Soldier is accused of the sexual assault of another Soldier he had a short-term relationship with.  Court-martial charges are preferred and the Soldier retains Cave & Freeburg, LLP.  Mr. Freeburg investigates and litigates the case including filing several motions to shape the trial.  As the evidence and witnesses develop, Mr. Freeburg keeps fighting and eventually the Army agrees to a separation instead of a court-martial!

Result: No Federal Conviction, No Sex Offender Registration, No Dishonorable Discharge.

U.S. v. O-5, Fort McNair, Washington, D.C. 

An Army Lieutenant Colonel is accused by an Army Major of sexually assaulting her at his home while they were on a date.  After a long investigation, the client’s retirement is put on hold and court-martial charges are preferred against him.  At the Article 32 preliminary hearing, Mr. Freeburg strongly argues that the case should not be prosecuted and that there is no probable cause because the sexual intercourse was clearly consensual and the Major had a strong motive to fabricate her allegations.  The hearing officer agrees and recommends dismissing the case.  Finally, the Army dismisses the court-martial charges!

Result: Charges Dismissed.  No Federal Conviction, No Sex Offender Registration, No Dishonorable Discharge, Retirement Preserved.

U.S. v. E-4, United States Army, Fort Bragg, North Carolina. 

Soldier is accused of the sexual abuse of a child and of sexually assaulting her mother and is facing many years in prison.  Court-martial charges are preferred and the Soldier retains Cave & Freeburg, LLP.  Mr. Freeburg extensively litigates the case including filing several motions to shape the trial.  As the evidence and witnesses develop, Mr. Freeburg keeps fighting and shortly before trial begins the Army agrees to a separation instead of a court-martial!

Result: No Federal Conviction, No Sex Offender Registration, No Dishonorable Discharge.

U.S. v. E-5, United States Army, Fort Campbell, Kentucky. 

A Soldier was charged with the rape of another Soldier along with battery and extramarital relations.  He retained Cave & Freeburg, LLP.  After the defense discovered that the alleged victim had lied about various details of the relationship and Mr. Freeburg and Mr. Cave following with lengthy litigation and motions, the government agreed to a guilty plea for only misdemeanor battery and the extramarital relationship!

Result: Not Guilty of All Sexual Assault Charges, No Sex Offender Registration.

U.S. v. O-3, United States Air Force, Pentagon. 

Air Force officer is accused of various financial crimes and held past his term of service for a court-martial.  Mr. Cave and Mr. Freeburg investigate the case and prepare defenses. Eventually, the Air Force drops the case and the officer leaves service without even going to trial!

Result: No Federal Conviction, No Dishonorable Discharge, No Dismissal, Honorable Discharge.

U.S. v. E-4, United States Air Force, Edwards Air Force Base, California. 

Senior Airman is accused of sexually assaulting both vaginally and anally another Airman along with recording the sex. Then her best friend also accused the Senior Airman of sexually assaulting her on a different occasion!  The first set of charges involved a night of casual, consensual sex in Korea.  Mr. Nathan Freeburg was retained after the preferral of charges and conducted an in-depth investigation into the allegations.  As the case made its way to trial the charges were dropped of vaginal penetration for both the first and second alleged victim, leaving charges of forced anal penetration and recoding the sex for trial. At trial, Mr. Freeburg destroyed the government’s witnesses (including multiple experts) in front of an Air Force panel resulting in a verdict of “Not Guilty” to all charges and specifications!  

Result: Not Guilty on All Charges, No Federal Conviction, No Sex Offender Registration, No Dishonorable Discharge.

U.S. v. E-8, United States Army, Fort Knox, Kentucky. 

A senior Army recruiter is accused of ingesting methamphetamine and lying about it.  The Army prefers court-martial charges against the Master Sergeant putting his entire retirement at risk.  Mr. Freeburg investigates the case, prepares a defense and then brings the Army to the negotiating table where they agree to a summary court-martial (which is not legally a conviction) and protection of the Soldier’s retirement!  

Result: No Federal Conviction, No Confinement, No Discharge, Retirement Preserved.

U.S. v. O-3, United States Navy, Navy Yard, District of Columbia. 

Navy officer is accused of soliciting sex from an underage male (who was actually an adult “vigilante.”  After a long investigation, the Navy preferred court-martial charges against the officer.  Mr. Freeburg and Mr. Cave investigate the case and prepare an unlawful entrapment defense.  Following, the Navy agrees to a separation instead of a court-martial.

Result: No Federal Conviction, No Sex Offender Registration, No Dishonorable Discharge.

U.S. v. E-4, Fort Drum, New York. 

An Army Specialist is accused by another soldier of sexually assaulting her in her barracks room.  After a long investigation, court-martial charges are preferred against the client.  At the Article 32 preliminary hearing, Mr. Freeburg strongly argues that the case should not be prosecuted.  The hearing officer agrees and recommends dismissing the case.  Instead, charges are referred to a general court-martial.  After referral of charges, Mr. Freeburg investigates the case further and presents the government with discovery demands and expert requests while simultaneously explaining why the case should be dismissed.  Eventually, the Army agrees and dismisses all court-martial charges!

Result: Charges Dismissed.  No Federal Conviction, No Sex Offender Registration, No Dishonorable Discharge.

U.S. v. E-6, United States Army, Fort Knox, Kentucky. 

An Army Staff Sergeant who was serving as the NCOIC for a LTG’s Personal Security Detail was charged five specifications of sexual assault, one charge of aggravated assault with a loaded firearm and many charges for alcohol use, steroids, false official statements, fraternization and sexual harassment, all based upon allegations made by his team.  Vigorously litigating the case from start to finish, Mr. Freeburg was able to have the steroid charges dropped before trial and then at trial, cross-examined the multiple accusers in front of a the panel and then gave a closing argument that tied all of the reasonable doubts together.  As a result, the panel acquitted the Soldier of all charges of sexual assault and aggravated assault, and most of the other specifications, resulting in a sentence to a reduction and forfeitures! 

Result: Not Guilty of All Sexual Assault and Aggravated Assault Charges, No Sex Offender Registration, No Punitive Discharge, No Confinement.

U.S. v. E-3, United States Air Force, Sheppard Air Force Base, Texas. 

Airman is accused of sexually assaulting two different Air Force enlisted women and is placed into pretrial confinement.  After being retained to defend the Airman, Mr. Freeburg is able to show through numerous witness interviews that there were serious issues with one accuser’s story and that the other accuser had only made her allegation after she was caught committing adultery with a different Airman.  After extensive litigation, the Air Force agrees to a Chapter 4 discharge instead of court-martial.

Result: No Federal Conviction, No Sex Offender Registration, No Dishonorable Discharge.

U.S. v. O-5, United States Army, Fort Belvoir, Virginia. 

Lieutenant Colonel is accused of multiple specifications of sexual assault by a disgruntled officer with an axe to grind.  After a year long investigation, Mr. Freeburg presents Army C.I.D. with exculpatory evidence proving that the allegations are a bold-faced lie.  As a result, no probable cause is found and the investigation is ended, saving the officer’s career!

Result: Case Dismissed.  No Federal Conviction, No Sex Offender Registration, No Dishonorable Discharge.

2021 Case Results

U.S. v. E-3, United States Marine Corps, Camp Lejeune, North Carolina. 

A young Marine was charged with male on male rape, penetrative sexual assault, multiple specifications of abusive sexual contact involving a total of eight alleged male victims and several other charges such as indecent language, for a potential maximum sentence of life plus three hundred years in prison.  He was placed in pretrial confinement and then retained Mr. Freeburg.  After lengthy preparation and case investigation into the many lies told by the alleged victims and after seating a panel on the first day of trial, the government agreed to a guilty plea for only misdemeanor battery and providing alcohol to minors with a sentence of time served!

Result: Not Guilty of Rape and All Sexual Assault Charges, No Sex Offender Registration.

U.S. v. E-2, United States Marine Corps, Camp Lejeune, North Carolina. 

A young Marine was charged with penetrative sexual assault, multiple specifications of abusive sexual contact involving four alleged victims and several other charges.  He was placed in pretrial confinement and then retained Mr. Freeburg.  Through a lengthy motions practice and an exhaustive case investigation along with the detailed Marine defense counsel, Mr. Freeburg was able to bring the government to the table to agree to a guilty plea for only misdemeanor battery and with a sentence of time served!

Result: Not Guilty of Rape and All Sexual Assault Charges, No Sex Offender Registration.

U.S. v. O-4, United States Navy, Navy Yard, Washington, D.C.

Navy officer with a sterling career record at some of the United States’ most decorated and deployed classified units and task forces is accused of two specifications of assault, including use of a firearm. Mr. Nathan Freeburg works with the officer through the investigation process to prepare and after charges are preferred works with experienced Navy defense lawyers to counter the government at every turn. Finally, at trial, Mr. Freeburg and the defense team use cross-examination and indirect tactics in front of a very senior Navy officer panel and the client is acquitted!

Result: Full Acquittal on All Charges. No Federal Conviction, No Dishonorable Discharge.

U.S. v. E-4, United States Army, Joint Base Lewis-McChord, Washington. 

An Army Specialist was charged with rape and four specifications of penetrative sexual assault, one charge of misdemeanor strangulation and one charge for violating an order not to drink alcohol.  At trial, Mr. Freeburg was able to show through cross-examination of the CID agent that the Soldier was manipulated into making a false confession.  Mr. Freeburg was also able to successfully cross-examine the government’s expert in forensic psychology who testified as to “tonic immobility”, instead showing that the alleged victim likely froze due to past trauma.  Consequently, an enlisted panel acquitted the Soldier of all charges of rape and sexual assault!

Result: Not Guilty of Rape and All Sexual Assault Charges, No Sex Offender Registration, No Punitive Discharge.

U.S. v. E-7, United States Army, Kaiserslautern, Germany. 

An E-7 with nearly 25 years of service was accused of strangling his wife on four different occasions (aggravated assault), burning her with a frying pan and twice making a serious threat.  Mr. Freeburg investigated the case and determined that the allegations were made in the context of a custody dispute and developed a gameplan to cross-examine the alleged victim on her motivations at trial.  Despite the prosecution introducing supposed photos of injuries and testimony from an expert in strangulation, the Soldier was acquitted of all charges of aggravated assault and making threats and only convicted of one lesser included offense of misdemeanor battery.

Result: Acquittal on All Serious Charges, No Confinement, Retirement Preserved.  

U.S. v. E-7, United States Navy, Naval Station Norfolk, Virginia. 

An E-7 stationed overseas in 2018 was accused of three specifications of having sex with a prostitute overseas and three specifications of anal rape. In March 2019 he was found guilty of the prostitution charges only and the alleged rapes were dismissed. On appeal, he retained Mr. Philip Cave to represent him.  In February 2019, the civilian police in Virginia had been investigating allegations against the same E-7 of oral and vaginal rape of a local woman, as well as attempted anal rape, assault with intent to rape, and robbery. The civilian authorities decided not to prosecute so the now E-1 client was prosecuted at a general court-martial and elected to be represented by Mr. Cave. In this new trial, he was found not guilty of all charges and specifications by a panel of officer and enlisted members. The appeal of his first conviction is still underway.  

Result: Full Acquittal on All Charges.  No Sex Offender Registration.

U.S. v. E-4, United States Air Force, Sheppard Air Force Base, Texas. 

Airman is accused of having sexual intercourse with a thirteen-year old girl and videoing a portion of the encounter as production of child pornography.  Mr. Freeburg is retained to defend the Airman and develops a robust defense based upon the fact that the alleged victim had claimed to be nineteen and had numerous ongoing mental health issues and false allegations.  After extensive litigation and several continuances, the Air Force agrees to a Chapter 4 discharge instead of court-martial.

Result: No Federal Conviction, No Sex Offender Registration.

U.S. v. O-2, United States Navy, Naval Station Norfolk, Virginia. 

Navy officer is raided by the FBI and accused after a joint investigation with the state police and NCIS of the possession and distribution of hundreds of images of child pornography.  Mr. Nathan Freeburg works with the officer through the investigation process to prepare and when charges are preferred fights the government with an aggressive motions practice.  At trial, the prosecution shows the panel of senior Navy officers a highly explicit video of child pornography in an attempt to inflame their passions and convict the client based on emotion.  Mr. Freeburg flips the government’s strategy and computer forensic experts against them and wraps all the evidence together in a closing argument with the result that the panel only deliberates for two hours before acquitting the LTjg of all charges!

Result: Full Acquittal on All Charges.  No Federal Conviction, No Sex Offender Registration, No Dishonorable Discharge.

2020 Case Results

U.S. v. E-6, United States Army, Fort Rucker, Alabama.

Staff Sergeant is accused of multiple specifications of sexual assault and fraternization by a junior Soldier with an ax to grind. Mr. Freeburg prepares a full-scale attack on the government’s case for the Article 32 hearing. As a result, the Preliminary Hearing Officer (PHO) recommends not proceeding with a general court-martial. Finally, the government agrees and withdraws and dismisses the charges.

Result: Case Dismissed. No Federal Conviction, No Sex Offender Registration, No Dishonorable Discharge.

U.S. v. E-6, United States Army, Fort Lee, Virginia.

Staff Sergeant is accused of attempted sexual assault, indecent exposure and soliciting the unauthorized access of a government computer system. Charges are referred to a Special Court-Martial even though the allegations were absurd. The government pushed the Soldier to submit a Chapter 10 (Other Than Honorable Discharge) in lieu of trial, threatening to make him a registered sex offender if he went to trial. Mr. Freeburg is retained and prepares a game plan for an acquittal, attacking every part of the government’s case. Five days before trial, the government withdraws and dismisses the charges.

Result: Case Dismissed. No Federal Conviction, No Sex Offender Registration, No Dishonorable Discharge.

U.S. v. O-5, Fort Belvoir.

The client was accused of male-on-male sexual assault by two Soldiers. Advocacy post-Article 32, UCMJ, hearing, resulted in all charges being dismissed, and the client returned to full duty.

U.S. v. LCpl, U.S. Marine Corps.

After a Lance Corporal was convicted at a court-martial for two specifications of sexual assault and sentenced to four years in prison and a dishonorable discharge he retained Mr. Freeburg to file an appeal in the Navy-Marine Court of Criminal Appeals. Mr. Freeburg argued on appeal that the evidence was factually insufficient for a conviction and that the government had committed prosecutorial misconduct and the military judge had erred in denying a defense witness.

Result: Conviction Reversed and All Charges Dismissed With Prejudice.

U.S. v. E-4, United States Air Force, RAF Lakenheath, United Kingdom.

Air Force Senior Airman (E-4) is accused of receipt and possession of child pornography, solicitation of child pornography and attempted receipt of child pornography for having intimate pictures of his sixteen year-old girlfriend. Mr. Freeburg investigates the allegations, develops a defense case, fights the Article 32 hearing, consults with the client and drafts a memorandum to the command explaining why the Air Force should grant a Chapter 4 Separation in Lieu of Trial. The command agrees.

Result: No Federal Conviction, No Sex Offender Registration.

Arkansas v. CW4, Arkansas Army National Guard.

After a Chief Warrant Officer 4 was convicted at a court-martial for maltreatment (for an alleged sexual assault) and an orders violation by the Arkansas Army National Guard, despite the fact that the alleged incident happened while he was not on drill status! The CW4 retained Mr. Freeburg to file an appeal in the Arkansas Supreme Court despite having to take on the Arkansas Army National Guard and the Arkansas Attorney General every step of the way. Finally, the Arkansas Supreme Court found that Mr. Freeburg’s interpretation of the law was persuasive and overturned the conviction because there was no jurisdiction by the Arkansas Army National Guard.

Result: Conviction Reversed!

U.S. v. O-3, Norfolk, VA.

The client was accused of rape of a female co-worker, a situation where he was the real victim. We reported this to the MCIO, met with the MCIO, and provided some corroboration of the allegation that he was the victim. As a result of a (strangely) thorough investigation with the client’s cooperation he was cleared and returned to full duty. This is an example of when it is helpful to hire civilian counsel early. Mr. Cave’s work here forestalled even the preferral of charges which otherwise were likely to come.

U.S. v. E-5, United States Marine Corps, Quantico, Virginia.

Sergeant is accused of illicit drug use under Article 112a, UCMJ, and charges are referred to a Special Court-Martial even though the accused Marine was adamant that the urinalysis had resulted in a false positive and was awaiting a medical discharge. Mr. Nathan Freeburg is retained and prepares a game plan for an acquittal, attacking every part of the government’s case. After rejecting an absurd government proposal for a deal, Mr. Freeburg conducted an aggressive motions practice, setting the stage for trial. After the motions hearing, the command drops the case allowing the medical discharge to go through.

Result: No Federal Conviction, Honorable Discharge, Full VA Benefits.

U.S. v. E-6, United States Army, Fort Shafter, Hawaii.

Army Staff Sergeant is accused of the sexual assault of his ex-wife and of indecent recording and broadcast, all allegations leading to sex-offender registration. Mr. Nathan Freeburg investigates the alleged victim, attacks the government’s case in motions and prepares for a robust counter-attack at trial. A week before trial, the prosecution offers a Chapter 10 discharge in lieu of trial, meaning no conviction, no registration, which the Accused accepts.

Result: No Federal Conviction, No Sex Offender Registration.

U.S. v. E-5, United States Marine Corps, Parris Island, South Carolina.

Sergeant is accused of violating 12 specifications of Article 132, UCMJ (making a false claim), 10 specifications of Article 124, UCMJ (also making a false claim), 10 specifications of Article 107, UCMJ (false official statement), and 10 specifications of Article 121, UCMJ (larceny), for a total of 42 specifications! Mr. Nathan Freeburg was retained early in the process and developed an extensive game plan for an acquittal. After rejecting an absurd government proposal for a deal, Mr. Freeburg conducted an aggressive motions practice, setting the stage for trial. At trial, Mr. Freeburg developed the client’s defense through the prosecution’s own witnesses. Despite the five-page charge sheet the panel took just over an hour to deliver a Not Guilty verdict!

Result: Full Acquittal on All Charges, No Federal Conviction, No Discharge.

2019 Case Results

U.S. v. E-6, United States Navy.

In December 2017 a Sailor was accused of the rape and sexual assault of two women on the same night. A few months later the client was involuntarily extended on active duty for the investigation although charges were not preferred until April 2019. Mr. Philip Cave puts on a vigorous defense at the Article 32 hearing with the result that the rape allegations involving one of the women are dismissed. In December 2019–732 days after the alleged events, a court-martial panel found the Sailor not guilty!

Result: Full Acquittal on All Charges, No Federal Conviction, No Sex Offender Registration, No Dishonorable Discharge.

U.S. v. E-6, United States Army, Fort Jackson, South Carolina.

Staff Sergeant is accused of the sexual assault of a civilian by anal penetration as well as aggravated assault by strangulation. Both charges involved acts during a night of casual, consensual sex. Mr. Nathan Freeburg was retained after the preferral of charges and conducted an in-depth investigation into the allegations. Mr. Freeburg found that the alleged victim’s allegations were a result of her mental instability and need for self-authenticity as a “victim.” At trial, Mr. Freeburg used a robust cross-examination of the alleged victim as well as of the government’s strangulation expert in front of an Army panel to destroy the government’s case. The panel only took 65 minutes to return a verdict of “Not Guilty!”

Result: Full Acquittal, All Charges, No Federal Conviction, No Sex Offender Registration, No Dishonorable Discharge.

U.S. v. E-4, United States Air Force, Eielson Air Force Base, Alaska.

Senior Airman is accused of the sexual assault of a Senior Airman in her dormitory room after a night of drinking along with the abusive sexual contact of another Senior Airman that same night as well as three incidents of abusive sexual contact of a third Senior Airman, for a total of seven specifications of sexual assault under the UCMJ. Mr. Nathan Freeburg was retained months before the preferral of charges and conducted an in-depth investigation into the allegations. Mr. Freeburg found that the Air Force Office of Special Investigations (OSI) had engaged in a rush to judgment and had essentially created the second and third “victims” in an effort to ensure that his client was convicted as a sexual predator. Despite all of these strikes against the client, Mr. Freeburg uses a robust cross-examination defense in front of an Air Force panel to destroy the government’s case and put OSI on trial.

Result: Full Acquittal on All Charges, No Federal Conviction, No Sex Offender Registration, No Dishonorable Discharge.

U.S. v. E-7, United States Navy, Naples, Italy

A Sailor was accused of violating federal anti-sex trafficking laws while stationed overseas and adultery by having sex with a prostitute. NCIS never bothered to do a basic investigation which would have established the likelihood of a defense to the charges while Mr. Philip Cave conducted a full investigation and prepared a robust defense. After the prosecution presented their case to the members the defense motion to dismiss everything but the adultery allegation was dismissed under R.C.M. 917. After that the members found the client not guilty of the adultery.

Result: Full Acquittal on All Charges, No Federal Conviction, No Discharge.

U.S. v. E-6, United States Army, Fort Lee, Virginia.

Army Staff Sergeant is accused of molesting a ten-year old girl. Knowing that sexual assault of a child cases are the hardest to defend because in practical terms there is no presumption of innocence, Mr. Nathan Freeburg conducts an in-depth investigation into the allegation. Meanwhile, the prosecution does everything possible to oppose the trial being delayed, so that Mr. Freeburg can be on the case, and the Army brings in an expert field-grade prosecutor from the Trial Counsel Assistance Program (TCAP) to oppose him. After investigating the case and consulting with medical experts, Mr. Freeburg realizes that the allegation likely was the result of a dream based upon a movie the child had watched. After preparing for every eventuality, Mr. Freeburg uses crossexamination and expert witnesses to destroy the government’s case in front of a military jury.

Result: Full Acquittal on All Charges, No Federal Conviction, No Sex Offender Registration, No Dishonorable Discharge.

U.S. v. E-4, Washington Navy Yard.

The client was one of a number of Sailors caught up in a sex scandal at Navy Support Activity Bahrain. He was accused of having sex with a prostitute and extremely serious charges of sex trafficking for the purposes of prostitution. The case involved significant pretrial litigation. After the prosecution completed its case, the military judge granted Mr. Cave’s motion to find the client not guilty of all of the charges except one of adultery. The members then found the client not guilty of adultery.

Result: Full acquittal on all charges, no federal conviction, no sex offender registration, and return to full duty. 

U.S. v. E-4, Lackland Air Force Base.

Mr. Cave represented the client on appeal and succeeded in having the conviction reversed. The AF decided to retry the case. However, after various motions sessions and advocacy, the AF was convinced that an administrative separation was the best solution to the case. While the client had spent time in confinement because of the first trial, the end result was no conviction and most importantly removal from the sex offender registration list in his state of residence.

U.S. v. O-5, United States Army, Fort Belvoir, Virginia.

Army LTC (O-5) with 26 years of service is accused of accepting illegal gratuities and a conspiracy to steer $12MM in contracts, among other charges, and is facing a potential prison sentence and loss of millions of dollars in retirement benefits. Mr. Nathan Freeburg works with a team of civilian and military lawyers to defend the client in front of an all O-6 military panel. Mr. Freeburg prepares the client for his sentencing statement and gives the sentencing argument after the Government requested a dismissal of the officer, which would result in the loss of his entire retirement. Mr. Freeburg asks the panel to sentence Client to a reprimand and a fine. The panel agrees.

Result: Retirement Preserved.

U.S. v. E-5, United States Army, Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, Alaska.

Army Sergeant is accused of directing a group sexual assault of an 18-year-old Air Force service member and also of sexually assaulting this alleged victim himself on multiple occasions throughout the evening, for a total of eight specifications of sexual assault under the UCMJ. Mr. Nathan Freeburg was retained months before the preferral of charges and conducted an in-depth investigation into the allegations. After charges are preferred and referred, one of the two co-accused junior Soldiers made a plea deal and pled guilty to sexual assault resulting in sex offender registration for that Soldier and two years in prison. In return he agreed to testify against Mr. Freeburg’s client. Despite all of these strikes against the client, Mr. Freeburg uses a robust cross-examination defense to destroy the government’s case.

Result: Full Acquittal on All Charges, No Federal Conviction, No Sex Offender Registration, No Dishonorable Discharge.

U.S. v. E-4, United States Air Force, Italy.

Air Force Airman (E-4) is accused of the sexual assault of another airman as well as other misconduct. Mr. Nathan Freeburg investigates the alleged victim on social media, develops a defense case, consults with the client and drafts a memorandum to the command explaining why the Air Force should grant a Chapter 4 Separation in Lieu of Trial. The command agrees.

Result: No Federal Conviction, No Sex Offender Registration.

2018 and Prior Courts-Martial Results

An Army officer and medical was provider was accused of assaulting seven different patients. At court-martial, he was convicted of the sexual assault of one patient. Mr. Philip Cave appealed the guilty verdict to the Army Court of Criminal Appeals which agreed there was not a fair trial and reversed the findings of guilt. Mr. Cave represented the officer at a retrial in Fort Sill, OK, put on a strong defense and he was acquitted.

Result: Full Acquittal on All Charges, No Federal Conviction, No Sex Offender Registration, No Discharge.

A Marine Sergeant and recruiter was accused of conspiracy, effecting unlawful enlistment, misprision of a serious offense, making false statements and other offenses. The case was referred to a Special Court-Martial. Although the prosecution made multiple attempts to force a plea deal, instead Mr. Nathan Freeburg aggressively filed five dispositive motions to dismiss various charges. The command dismissed the case. Following, the command initiated an administrative separation board. Mr. Freeburg successfully defended the board and the Marine was retained in service.

Result: No Federal Conviction, No Discharge.

An E-6 Sailor at Naval Station Jacksonville was accused of actively participating in a nationwide criminal outlaw motorcycle gang. With the client’s military retirement on the line, Mr. Nathan Freeburg was retained only a couple weeks before trial. He immediately filed motions to keep out highly prejudicial evidence and was successful. At the court-martial, Mr. Nathan Freeburg cross-examined the “gang experts” and police officers brought in by the prosecution and took apart the Navy’s case.

Result: Full Acquittal on All Charges, No Federal Conviction, No Discharge.

In a panel trial at Fort Benning, Mr. Nathan Freeburg defended a non-commissioned officer accused of the forcible rape and forcible sodomy of another soldier in Kosovo in a case involving the extensive discovery of social media accounts and where the client had allegedly confessed to the crimes in pretext messages. Developed a strategy for dealing with the apparent confession and exhaustively prepared the client for taking the stand in his own defense, resulting in an acquittal!

Result: Full Acquittal on All Charges, No Federal Conviction, No Discharge, No Sex Offender Registration

Mr. Philip Cave defends an Air Force O-6 who was accused of rape, war crimes, and various other offenses while deployed. After 18 months of investigation and a strong defense throughout the process by Mr. Cave, the allegations were reduced to a number of instances of adultery – for which a letter of reprimand was given.

Result: No Federal Conviction, No Discharge, No Sex Offender Registration

Mr. Nathan Freeburg efended a non-commissioned officer accused of the theft of a sensitive military weapon in Afghanistan and its sale in the United States. In a contested bench trial, after cross-examination of the government witnesses, Mr. Freeburg made the controversial decision to not put on a defense case of any kind, resulting in a FULL ACQUITTAL.

Result: Full Acquittal on All Charges, No Federal Conviction, No Discharge.

A warrant officer at Fort Rucker was charged with forcible rape and multiple physical assaults with a firearm and facing a potential sentence to life. Mr. Nathan Freeburg fought the case for a year through multiple motions hearings and a discovery battle against a very experienced and senior prosecution team until the case went to a weeklong jury trial. The accused was ACQUITTED OF RAPE and all but one assault charge and sentenced to a partial forfeiture of pay for two months.

Result: No Sex Offender Registration, No Discharge.

Mr. Philip Cave is retained to appeal the sexual assault conviction of an Airman to the Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals where he argues that the Airman did not receive a fair trial due to the prosecution’s use of “predisposition evidence.” The Court agrees and the verdict of guilty is overturned!

Result: No Sex Offender Registration, No Federal Conviction.

Mr. Nathan Freeburg defended a Marine Private at Quantico who was accused of the sexual assault of another Marine and of violating an order. The Marine was placed in pretrial confinement by his command, causing numerous roadblocks for the defense. Nevertheless he retained Nathan Freeburg, who made extensive discovery and expert witness demands, challenging the prosecution on various fronts. The eventual result was that the government dropped the court martial charges and took an administrative result instead, meaning no criminal conviction and no sex offender registration.

Result: No Sex Offender Registration, No Federal Conviction.

Mr. Philip Cave defended an Army E-4 who was accused of assaulting a female Soldier and also accused of sexually assaulting another female Soldier. After a contested judge alone trial the Soldier was found not guilty of the charges.

Result: Full Acquittal on All Charges, No Federal Conviction, No Discharge, No Sex Offender Registration

Mr. Nathan Freeburg defended a high-speed NCO at Fort Benning against a drug charge in a panel (jury) trial. Mr. Freeburg extensively prepared the client for taking the stand in his own defense and put-on corroborative testimony in front of the panel.

Result: Full Acquittal on All Charges, No Federal Conviction, No Discharge.

Mr. Nathan Freeburg aggressively defended a young junior Soldier accused of the sexual assault of another Soldier at Fort Rucker, resulting in a complete victory.

Result: Full Acquittal on All Charges, No Federal Conviction, No Discharge, No Sex Offender Registration

Mr. Philip Cave defended Air Force E-5 accused of forcible rape. After a thorough investigation, Mr. Cave is able to mount an aggressive defense at the Article 32, UCMJ, hearing. Subsequently, all charges were dismissed without even going to trial.

Result: No Federal Conviction, No Discharge, No Sex Offender Registration

Send Us a Message and Your Contact Number for a Fast and Accurate Reply