Joseph L. Jordan - Court-Martial Defense Attorney
Understanding the Court-Martial Process
What Is a Court-Martial?
A court-martial is the military's criminal trial system, established under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) to prosecute service members accused of violating military law. Unlike civilian criminal proceedings, courts-martial operate within a unique legal framework that combines elements of federal criminal law with military-specific procedures and regulations. These proceedings are federal criminal trials, not administrative actions, and convictions result in federal criminal records that persist beyond military service.
The court-martial system applies to all active-duty service members across every branch: Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, Space Force, and Coast Guard, as well as certain reserve components and retired personnel receiving pay. The jurisdiction extends worldwide, wherever American service members are stationed or deployed, from stateside installations to forward operating bases in combat zones.
Do I Need a Court-Martial Attorney If I Have Military Defense Counsel?
While Trial Defense Service (TDS) provides free military defense counsel to all accused service members, many choose to retain a civilian court-martial attorney for several critical reasons. Military defense counsel often carry overwhelming caseloads, sometimes managing multiple cases simultaneously. They rotate out of positions every two to three years, potentially leaving mid-case. Additionally, they operate within the same command structure that is prosecuting you, which can create institutional pressures.
A civilian court-martial attorney brings focused attention to your case, extensive preparation time, and complete independence from military influence. You can have both: retain a civilian attorney as lead counsel while keeping your military defender as associate counsel, maximizing your defense resources. Given that a court-martial conviction creates a permanent federal criminal record, affects VA benefits, and can result in incarceration and punitive discharge, the investment in experienced civilian representation often proves valuable for many service members. The decision ultimately depends on case complexity, potential consequences, and your comfort level with assigned military counsel.
When Should I Contact a Court-Martial Attorney?
The moment you learn you are under investigation or suspect you might be accused of a UCMJ violation, you should consult with a court-martial attorney immediately. Many service members make the critical mistake of waiting until charges are preferred or until after speaking with investigators. By then, damaging statements may already exist, evidence may be lost, and witnesses' memories may fade.
Early intervention by a court-martial attorney can influence the commander's initial disposition decision, potentially steering your case away from court-martial toward administrative action or non-judicial punishment. Your attorney can engage with CID, NCIS, or OSI investigators on your behalf, ensuring your rights are protected during questioning. They can also begin preserving favorable evidence, identifying defense witnesses, and developing strategic approaches before the government solidifies its case. Remember that anything you say to investigators, your command, or even fellow service members can become evidence against you. The right to remain silent under Article 31(b) exists from the moment suspicion focuses on you, not just after charges are filed.
What Should I Look for When Choosing a Court-Martial Attorney?
Selecting the right court-martial attorney requires evaluating several critical factors beyond basic legal credentials. Military justice operates differently from civilian criminal law, making specific military experience essential. Look for attorneys with actual court-martial trial experience, not just general military law background. Former JAG officers who have served as prosecutors or military judges bring valuable insider knowledge of how the government builds cases and how military judges analyze legal issues.
Consider asking potential attorneys about their experience with your specific type of charges, whether Article 120 sexual assault, Article 112a drug offenses, or other UCMJ violations. Inquire about their familiarity with your military branch's culture and procedures, as each service has unique approaches to military justice. Security clearance status matters for cases involving classified evidence. Ask about their experience in contested cases, though remember that past results cannot guarantee future outcomes. Evaluate their availability and whether they personally handle cases or delegate to junior associates. Finally, ensure they are licensed in a jurisdiction that allows them to practice at your installation and confirm their good standing with relevant bar associations.
How Much Does a Court-Martial Attorney Cost?
Court-martial attorney fees vary based on numerous factors including case complexity, attorney experience, geographic location, and anticipated length of proceedings. Each case presents unique circumstances that affect the time and resources required for effective defense. Factors that typically influence legal fees include the type of court-martial (Summary, Special, or General), whether the case proceeds to trial or resolves through negotiations, the need for expert witnesses or investigators, travel requirements to reach military installations, and the volume and complexity of evidence.
Most civilian military defense attorneys offer free initial consultations to evaluate your case and discuss fee arrangements. Many provide flexible payment options to help manage the financial aspects of representation. When considering costs, weigh them against potential consequences of conviction: loss of military retirement benefits, VA benefit implications, federal criminal record affecting future employment, possible incarceration, and punitive discharge characterization. During consultation, attorneys should provide clear information about their fee structure, what services are included, and any additional costs that might arise. Remember that you can utilize both free military counsel and retained civilian counsel simultaneously, potentially maximizing defense resources while managing costs.
Can a Court-Martial Attorney Help If I Already Made Statements to Investigators?
Yes, an experienced court-martial attorney can still provide crucial assistance even if you have already spoken to CID, NCIS, OSI, or your command. While prior statements cannot be withdrawn, a skilled attorney can work to minimize their impact through various legal strategies. They may challenge the admissibility of statements if your Article 31(b) rights were not properly administered or if the statements were coerced or involuntary.
Your attorney can provide context for statements taken out of context, identify inconsistencies in the government's interpretation of your words, and develop alternative explanations for seemingly incriminating statements. They can also assess whether investigators violated any procedures during questioning that might result in suppression of your statements. Moving forward, your attorney ensures no additional statements are made without careful preparation and protects you from further questioning. Remember that even after making initial statements, you retain the absolute right to remain silent and to have an attorney present for any future questioning. The key is preventing additional damage while strategically addressing existing statements through pretrial motions, cross-examination of investigators, and alternative evidence presentation.
The Three Types of Courts-Martial
Summary Court-Martial (SCM)
The summary court-martial represents the lowest level of military criminal proceedings, designed to address minor offenses where non-judicial punishment proves insufficient but formal trial seems excessive. A single commissioned officer presides over these proceedings, serving as the finder of fact and law, essentially functioning as judge and jury, though not as counsel for either party.
Composition and Procedure:
- One commissioned officer (typically O-3 or above)
- No military judge required
- No court reporter unless requested
- Simplified rules of evidence
- No automatic right to military defense counsel
Jurisdictional Limitations:
- Cannot try officers
- Cannot adjudicate capital offenses
- Cannot impose punitive discharge
- Limited to minor offenses
Maximum Punishments (per RCM 1301(d)(1)): For E-4 and below:
- 30 days confinement
- Hard labor without confinement for 45 days
- Restriction for 60 days
- Reduction to E-1
- Forfeiture of two-thirds pay for one month
For E-5 and above:
- No confinement authorized
- Restriction for 60 days
- Reduction by one grade
- Forfeiture of two-thirds pay for one month
Critical Rights: Service members may refuse trial by summary court-martial and demand trial by special or general court-martial. This decision requires careful consideration, as higher forums provide greater rights but expose the accused to more severe potential punishments.
Special Court-Martial (SPCM)
The special court-martial serves as the intermediate forum, addressing offenses too serious for summary disposition but not warranting the resources and severity of general court-martial proceedings. This forum resembles civilian misdemeanor court but operates under military rules and procedures.
Composition Options:
- Military judge alone (if requested by accused)
- Military judge with no fewer than four members (prior to 2019: three members)
- For enlisted accused: at least one-third enlisted members upon request
Jurisdictional Authority:
- All non-capital offenses under the UCMJ
- Any person subject to UCMJ jurisdiction
- Worldwide geographic jurisdiction
Maximum Punishments:
- Bad-conduct discharge (enlisted only; officers cannot receive BCD)
- Confinement for 12 months
- Hard labor without confinement for 3 months
- Reduction to E-1 (enlisted)
- Forfeiture of two-thirds pay per month for 12 months
- Fine not exceeding total authorized forfeitures
Procedural Protections:
- Right to detailed military defense counsel
- Right to retained civilian counsel at personal expense
- Full discovery rights under RCM 701
- Application of Military Rules of Evidence
- Verbatim record of trial
- Automatic appellate review for qualifying sentences
General Court-Martial (GCM)
The general court-martial represents the military's highest trial forum, equivalent to civilian felony court with jurisdiction over all offenses under the UCMJ, including capital crimes. These proceedings involve the most complex procedures, greatest resources, and severest potential punishments.
Composition Requirements:
- Military judge and not less than eight members
- For capital cases: not less than 12 members (as amended by 2020 NDAA)
- Military judge alone if requested by accused (except capital cases)
- For enlisted accused: at least one-third enlisted members upon request
Jurisdictional Scope:
- All UCMJ offenses including capital crimes
- Any person subject to military jurisdiction
- Concurrent jurisdiction with civilian authorities for certain offenses
Maximum Punishments:
- Death (for specifically enumerated offenses)
- Confinement for life without eligibility for parole
- Dishonorable discharge (enlisted) or dismissal (officers)
- Total forfeiture of all pay and allowances
- Reduction to E-1 (enlisted only; officers cannot be reduced in grade)
- Fine of unlimited amount
- Loss of all military retirement benefits
Mandatory Procedures:
- Article 32 preliminary hearing required (unless waived by accused)
- Detailed military defense counsel required
- Verbatim record by qualified court reporter
- Military judge must be certified under Article 26(b) UCMJ
- Automatic appellate review
- Convening authority action required
The Pre-Trial Process
Initial Allegation and Investigation
The court-martial process typically begins when allegations surface through various channels: command reporting, law enforcement investigation, victim complaint, or witness observation. Upon receiving allegations, commanders must initiate preliminary inquiry to determine appropriate disposition.
Military Criminal Investigative Organizations (MCIOs) conduct investigations for serious offenses:
- Army: U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Division (CID)
- Navy/Marine Corps: Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS)
- Air Force: Office of Special Investigations (OSI)
- Coast Guard: Coast Guard Investigative Service (CGIS)
- Space Force: Utilizes Air Force OSI
These agencies operate independently from command influence, conducting investigations that parallel civilian law enforcement standards while incorporating military-specific considerations.
Command Disposition Decision
Following investigation completion, commanders consult with Staff Judge Advocates to determine appropriate disposition. Options include:
- No action
- Administrative action (counseling, letter of reprimand, administrative separation)
- Non-judicial punishment (Article 15/Captain's Mast/Office Hours)
- Preferral of charges for court-martial
This decision involves evaluating evidence strength, victim input, good order and discipline considerations, and resource availability. For certain enumerated offenses (primarily sexual assault), commanders must document their rationale when declining prosecution.
Preferral of Charges
Preferral initiates formal court-martial proceedings. The immediate commander or other authorized officer reviews evidence and swears to charges under oath, attesting to personal knowledge or belief based upon investigation. The charge sheet (DD Form 458) specifies:
- Accused's identifying information and unit
- Specific UCMJ articles allegedly violated
- Specifications detailing factual allegations
- Preferring officer's oath and signature
- Date and location of preferral
Upon preferral, the accused receives formal notice and the following rights immediately attach:
- Right to remain silent under Article 31(b)
- Right to military defense counsel
- Right to civilian counsel at personal expense
- Protection against unlawful pretrial punishment under Article 13
- Speedy trial protections under RCM 707 (accused must be brought to trial within 120 days of preferral or restraint, whichever is earlier)
Article 32 Preliminary Hearing
Purpose and Scope (Post-2016 Military Justice Act)
For cases potentially proceeding to general court-martial, Article 32 requires a preliminary hearing unless waived by the accused after consultation with defense counsel. This hearing, substantially modified by the Military Justice Act of 2016 (prior to 2016: broader investigation scope), now serves limited purposes:
- Determination of probable cause
- Consideration of form of charges
- Recommendation on disposition
- Limited discovery opportunity for the defense
The current hearing provides less discovery than pre-2016 investigations but still exceeds civilian grand jury protections.
Preliminary Hearing Officer
An impartial commissioned officer (typically O-4 or above) serves as Preliminary Hearing Officer (PHO), appointed by the convening authority but independent in function. The PHO must be:
- Senior to the accused when practicable
- Judge advocate qualified when practicable
- Free from unlawful command influence
- Trained in preliminary hearing procedures
Rights of the Accused at Article 32 Hearing
During Article 32 proceedings, the accused maintains these rights:
- Presence at all open sessions of the hearing
- Representation by detailed military counsel
- Representation by civilian counsel if retained
- Cross-examination of available witnesses
- Presentation of evidence and matters in defense, extenuation, or mitigation
- Making sworn or unsworn statements
- Requesting witnesses (though production is limited compared to pre-2016)
- Obtaining a recording of the proceedings
Victim Rights (Post-2016 Enhancements)
The Military Justice Act of 2016 significantly expanded victim rights:
- Right to decline to testify at Article 32 hearing
- Right to be heard through counsel
- Right to Special Victims' Counsel/Victims' Legal Counsel representation
- Protection from harassment during any testimony
- Privacy protections under MRE 412/513/514
PHO Report and Recommendations
Following the hearing, the PHO submits a written report as soon as practicable (per RCM 405(l)(1)) addressing:
- Whether each specification alleges an offense under the UCMJ
- Whether reasonable grounds exist to believe the accused committed the offenses
- Whether court-martial jurisdiction exists
- Recommended disposition of charges
While non-binding, PHO recommendations carry significant weight with convening authorities, particularly when recommending against referral or alternative disposition.
The Referral Process
Convening Authority Decision
The convening authority, either a Special Court-Martial Convening Authority (SPCMCA) or General Court-Martial Convening Authority (GCMCA), reviews:
- PHO report and recommendations (for GCM)
- Staff Judge Advocate's written pretrial advice
- Case file and evidence
- Victim input when required
Options available include:
- Referral to general court-martial
- Referral to special court-martial
- Referral to summary court-martial (with accused consent)
- Alternative disposition (Article 15, administrative action)
- Dismissal of charges
Staff Judge Advocate Pretrial Advice
Before general court-martial referral, the Staff Judge Advocate must provide written pretrial advice addressing:
- Whether each specification alleges an offense
- Whether reasonable grounds exist to believe the accused committed each offense
- Whether court-martial jurisdiction exists
- Recommendation for disposition
This advice becomes part of the record and is subject to appellate review for legal sufficiency.
Trial Preparation Phase
Panel Member Selection
The convening authority personally selects members based on Article 25 UCMJ criteria:
- Best qualified by reason of age, education, training, experience, length of service, and judicial temperament
- Cannot systematically exclude qualified personnel
- Must detail sufficient members to account for excusals
Selection based on perceived disposition toward conviction constitutes unlawful command influence and may result in reversal.
Discovery Process
Military discovery under RCM 701 includes:
Government Must Disclose:
- Charge sheet and allied papers
- Statements of the accused
- Witnesses' statements
- Documentary and real evidence
- Expert reports and analyses
- Prior convictions of the accused
- Evidence favorable to defense (Brady material)
- Evidence affecting witness credibility (Giglio material)
- Evidence in sentencing
Defense Obligations (if requesting reciprocal discovery):
- Notice of certain defenses (alibi, innocent ingestion, lack of mental responsibility)
- Names of witnesses
- Reciprocal evidence disclosure
The Trial Process
Forum Selection Rights
The accused may choose:
- Trial by military judge alone
- Trial by officer members
- For enlisted: trial with at least one-third enlisted members
This choice must be made before assembly and generally cannot be withdrawn without good cause shown.
Voir Dire and Challenges
Both parties may examine members regarding:
- Knowledge of the case
- Relationships with parties
- Preconceived opinions
- Ability to be impartial
- Command influence exposure
Challenges available:
- For cause (unlimited if bias demonstrated)
- Peremptory (one per side, no reason required but subject to constitutional limits)
Voting Requirements (Article 52, UCMJ as amended by 2016 MJA)
For Conviction:
- Non-capital cases: Three-fourths of members must concur (prior to 2016: two-thirds)
- Capital cases: Unanimous concurrence required
For Sentences:
- Death: Unanimous concurrence required
- Life without parole: Unanimous concurrence required
- Confinement over 10 years: Three-fourths must concur
- All other sentences: Three-fourths must concur (prior to 2016: two-thirds)
For Acquittal:
- If more than one-fourth vote not guilty on any specification: acquittal results
Sentencing Procedures
Presentencing Phase
Following conviction, sentencing proceeds immediately without the delays common in civilian systems:
Government presents:
- Personnel records showing service history
- Evidence of prior convictions
- Evidence in aggravation directly related to offenses
- Impact on discipline and unit readiness
- Victim impact statements (when applicable)
Defense presents:
- Matters in extenuation (explaining circumstances)
- Matters in mitigation (reducing punishment severity)
- Good military character evidence
- Deployment history and awards
- Rehabilitation potential evidence
- Family impact considerations
Unsworn Statement Right
The accused may make an unsworn statement without oath or cross-examination, a unique feature of military justice allowing personal address to sentencing authority while avoiding testimonial risks.
Post-Trial Processing
Immediate Post-Trial Actions
- Confinement begins immediately (unless deferred by convening authority)
- Automatic forfeitures under Article 58b apply
- Administrative discharge processing may begin
- Appeal rights advisement required promptly after trial
- Deferment/waiver requests may be submitted
Convening Authority Action (Post-2016 Limited Authority)
Following the Military Justice Act of 2016, convening authority powers are significantly restricted (prior to 2016: broader modification powers):
- Cannot modify findings of guilty (except for minor administrative errors)
- May approve, disapprove, commute, or suspend sentence in whole or part
- Must consider submitted clemency matters
- Must provide written action with reasons
Automatic Appellate Review
Cases receive automatic review by service Courts of Criminal Appeals if resulting in:
- Any punitive discharge (BCD, DD, or dismissal)
- Confinement of two years or more
- Death sentence
Service Courts review for:
- Legal error
- Factual sufficiency
- Sentence appropriateness
- Constitutional violations
Further review available through:
- Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (discretionary review)
- U.S. Supreme Court (petition for certiorari)
Special Considerations
Unlawful Command Influence (UCI)
UCI, termed "the mortal enemy of military justice" in case law, occurs when commanders or others improperly influence proceedings. Examples include:
- Comments on appropriate outcomes or conviction rates
- Panel selection based on perceived disposition
- Pressure on witnesses, counsel, or court members
- Creating command climate hostile toward acquittals or certain verdicts
UCI may result in case dismissal, sentence reduction, or appellate reversal.
Military Rules of Evidence
Key military-specific rules include:
- MRE 304-321: Search, seizure, and confessions in military context
- MRE 412: Sexual behavior evidence restrictions (rape shield)
- MRE 505: Classified information procedures
- MRE 513: Psychotherapist-patient privilege
- MRE 514: Victim advocate privilege
Speedy Trial Requirements
RCM 707 requires the accused be brought to trial within 120 days of the earlier of:
- Preferral of charges
- Imposition of restraint under RCM 304 (restriction, arrest, or confinement)
Excludable delays under RCM 707(c) include:
- Defense requests or consent
- Unavailability of accused
- Reasonable delays for witness production
- Interlocutory appeals
Violation may result in dismissal with or without prejudice depending on the circumstances.
Rights Throughout the Process
Fundamental rights include:
- Presumption of innocence
- Proof beyond reasonable doubt
- Right to remain silent (Article 31(b))
- Right to counsel (military provided and/or civilian retained)
- Right to speedy and public trial
- Confrontation of witnesses
- Compulsory process for obtaining witnesses
- Appeal rights
Additional Questions About Court-Martial Attorney Representation
What Is the Difference Between a Military Defense Counsel and a Civilian Court-Martial Attorney?
Military defense counsel, provided through Trial Defense Service (TDS) or Defense Service Office (DSO), are active-duty JAG officers assigned to represent service members at no cost. They are competent attorneys who understand military law and culture, but face certain structural limitations. They typically handle high caseloads, rotate assignments every few years, and work within the same military system prosecuting you. Their resources for investigations, expert witnesses, and case preparation are limited by military budgets.
A civilian court-martial attorney operates independently of the military command structure, free from institutional pressures or career concerns within the military system. They can dedicate unlimited time to your case, hire private investigators, retain civilian expert witnesses, and maintain complete confidentiality outside military channels. Civilian attorneys often have decades of experience compared to military counsel who may be relatively junior officers. You are not required to choose between them; you can have both working on your case, combining the military counsel's knowledge of local procedures with the civilian attorney's independence and resources.
Can a Court-Martial Attorney Represent Me at Administrative Boards and NJP Proceedings?
Yes, experienced court-martial attorneys regularly represent service members in proceedings beyond courts-martial. Administrative separation boards, though non-criminal, can end military careers and affect benefits for life. A court-martial attorney can present evidence, cross-examine witnesses, and argue for retention or honorable characterization. While you have the right to military counsel at these boards, civilian attorneys bring the same advantages of independence and focused preparation.
For Non-Judicial Punishment (Article 15/Captain's Mast), regulations vary by service regarding attorney presence. The Army and Air Force generally allow lawyers to accompany and advise clients during NJP proceedings, though they may not speak for you. The Navy and Marines traditionally restrict attorney participation more significantly. However, a court-martial attorney can still provide crucial assistance by helping you prepare your presentation, gathering evidence, drafting written matters, and advising whether to accept NJP or demand court-martial. They can also negotiate with command legal advisors behind the scenes, potentially influencing the outcome or convincing command to pursue alternative disposition.
How Does Attorney-Client Privilege Work with a Court-Martial Attorney?
Attorney-client privilege with your court-martial attorney provides robust protection for your communications, often stronger than what you might expect in military settings. Everything you tell your civilian attorney in confidence remains absolutely privileged, meaning it cannot be disclosed to your command, investigators, or prosecutors without your consent. This privilege covers not just your conversations but also emails, text messages, letters, and any documents you share for legal advice purposes.
The privilege applies from your very first consultation, even before formally retaining the attorney. It continues indefinitely, surviving even after your case ends or if you change attorneys. Military authorities cannot order your civilian attorney to violate this privilege, and any attempt to do so would constitute unlawful command influence. The privilege extends to your attorney's staff, including paralegals and investigators working on your case. Only you can waive this privilege, and even then, waiver must be knowing and voluntary. This protection allows you to be completely honest with your attorney about facts that might be damaging, enabling them to prepare the strongest possible defense while protecting your statements from disclosure.
Will Hiring a Court-Martial Attorney Affect My Military Career If I'm Acquitted?
Hiring a civilian court-martial attorney is your legal right and cannot be held against you officially. Commands are prohibited from taking adverse action based solely on your decision to retain civilian counsel. In fact, having skilled representation often helps preserve your career by achieving better outcomes, whether through acquittal, reduced charges, or favorable plea agreements.
Many service members worry about unofficial repercussions or being seen as not being a team player. However, commands generally respect service members who take allegations seriously enough to mount a proper defense. An acquittal or favorable outcome achieved through effective representation often allows for a cleaner return to duty than a conviction with lighter punishment. Your attorney can also help navigate post-trial career considerations, such as addressing evaluation reports, assignment limitations, or security clearance concerns. They can engage with command through appropriate channels to minimize career disruption during proceedings. Remember that a conviction's career impact far exceeds any perceived negativity from hiring civilian counsel. Many senior officers and NCOs who successfully defended against charges with civilian counsel have continued to successful military careers.
Can a Court-Martial Attorney Help If I'm Stationed Overseas?
Yes, experienced court-martial attorneys routinely represent service members stationed overseas, from Germany and Japan to Korea and deployed locations. The UCMJ applies identically regardless of location, and your right to civilian counsel remains unchanged. Many attorneys maintain practices specifically structured for international military representation, with experience navigating time zones, travel logistics, and coordination with overseas installations.
Modern technology facilitates overseas representation through secure video conferencing for consultations, encrypted communications for document exchange, and electronic filing systems. Your attorney will travel to your location for critical proceedings like Article 32 hearings and trial. Some attorneys maintain relationships with local counsel near major overseas bases for immediate assistance when needed. They understand Status of Forces Agreement implications, coordinate with overseas legal offices, and navigate base access requirements. The overseas environment sometimes provides advantages for defense, as witness availability issues and logistical challenges can affect the government's case. Your attorney can also coordinate with stateside witnesses and evidence gathering while you remain at your overseas duty station, ensuring your defense preparation continues regardless of your location.
When You Need Experienced Defense Representation
The court-martial process represents one of the most serious challenges a service member can face. Consequences extend beyond military service: federal conviction records, loss of veterans' benefits, employment limitations, security clearance revocation, and potential incarceration. These stakes demand experienced representation from counsel who understand both military culture and criminal law complexities.
About Joseph L. Jordan, Attorney at Law
Joseph L. Jordan is a court martial attorney based in the Fort Cavazos (Fort Hood) and Killeen, Texas area, focusing his practice on military justice and UCMJ defense. Mr. Jordan served ten years in the U.S. Army, including three years as an enlisted soldier and subsequent service as an Army JAG Officer. His military assignments included positions as a prosecutor at Fort Cavazos (Fort Hood), Texas, and with the 2nd Infantry Division in South Korea, where he also served as Interim Chief of Military Justice.
Since establishing his private practice in October 2011, Mr. Jordan has represented service members from all branches of the armed forces in courts-martial, administrative separation boards, boards of inquiry, and other military justice proceedings. His practice encompasses representation at installations worldwide, including locations in the United States, U.S. territories, Europe, Asia-Pacific, Latin America, the Middle East, and Africa.
Mr. Jordan earned his J.D. from the University of Arkansas at Little Rock and his B.S. in Justice Studies from Pittsburg State University. He completed the Judge Advocate Officer Basic Course and additional military legal training. He is a member of the American Bar Association (Criminal Law and Litigation Sections), the Arkansas Bar Association, and the Military Law Section of the Texas Bar Association.
Representation Scope:
- All military branches worldwide
- General, Special, and Summary Courts-Martial
- Article 32 Preliminary Hearings
- Administrative Separation Boards
- Security clearance proceedings
- Military appeals
Contact Joseph L. Jordan Today
If you are facing court-martial, UCMJ charges, or military administrative action, time is critical and early intervention can significantly impact your case outcome. Contact Joseph L. Jordan at (888) 689-4495 for a confidential consultation to discuss your defense options and protect your military career, benefits, and future.
Legal References
Primary Authorities:
- Uniform Code of Military Justice (10 U.S.C. §§ 801-946)
- Manual for Courts-Martial (2019 Edition)
- Rules for Courts-Martial (RCM)
- Military Rules of Evidence (MRE)
Key Changes:
- 2016 Military Justice Act: Modified Article 32 procedures, changed voting requirements from two-thirds to three-fourths for both convictions and sentences, limited convening authority powers
- 2019 NDAA: Increased special court-martial panel members from three to four
- 2020 NDAA: Increased capital case panel requirement to 12 members
Disclaimer: This guide provides general information about military justice procedures current as of 2024. Each case presents unique circumstances. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes. Attorney-client privilege applies only after formal representation agreement. Specific attorney credentials and experience should be independently verified. Legal procedures described are subject to change through legislation, executive order, or changes to the Manual for Courts-Martial.
Note: Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes. Each case presents unique circumstances requiring individual analysis.