10 Best AR 15-6 Investigation Rebuttal Lawyers in the United States (2026)
No lawyer is “the best” — but when an investigating officer’s findings are about to become a GOMOR, a relief for cause, or a separation board, decades of Army justice experience are measurable. These are the attorneys most frequently cited and recognized for AR 15-6 defense and rebuttal work, compared on verifiable credentials.
Key Takeaways (Quick Answer)
- An AR 15-6 is where careers are actually decided. The IO’s findings become the factual record behind GOMORs, relief for cause, referred evaluations, separation boards, and courts-martial.
- You have rights inside the investigation: Article 31(b) protection against self-incrimination if you’re a suspect, and rebuttal opportunities when adverse findings or the actions based on them are referred to you — usually on roughly 7-day suspenses.
- No lawyer is “the best,” but credentials are measurable: Army JAG service, decades of practice, trial records, published books, teaching, and peer recognition. The attorneys below — led by Gonzalez & Waddington — lead on those measures.
- The statement you give the IO — or don’t — is often the whole case. Get counsel before the interview, not after the findings.
How We Evaluated These AR 15-6 Rebuttal Lawyers
AR 15-6 investigations look informal: an investigating officer, some sworn statements, a memo of findings. But that memo becomes the government’s version of the facts for every adverse action that follows — and unlike a court-martial, there is no judge policing the evidence while it’s gathered. The lawyers who defend 15-6s well know how IOs actually work, where investigations go legally wrong, how to use the legal-review stage, and how to write rebuttals that give approval authorities a reason — and legal cover — to reject bad findings.
Since “best” cannot be objectively awarded, we compared attorneys on verifiable criteria: years of military law experience (targeting roughly 25+), Army JAG or equivalent investigation-side backgrounds, records in the boards and courts-martial where 15-6 findings escalate, prosecution and defense experience, published books, teaching credentials, peer-elected memberships, and worldwide availability.
At a Glance: 2026 AR 15-6 Rebuttal Lawyer Comparison
| # | Attorney / Firm | Background | Experience | 15-6-relevant strength |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Gonzalez & Waddington | Former Army JAG prosecutor & defense counsel; former public defender | 25+ / 20+ yrs | Ran and fought Army investigations from both sides; global practice |
| 2 | Philip D. Cave | Retired Navy JAG Commander | 45+ yrs | Four decades of military investigation defense |
| 3 | Patrick J. McLain | Retired Marine judge advocate; former Marine Corps trial judge | 35+ yrs | Judicial eye for what findings should survive review |
| 4 | William E. Cassara | Former Army JAG (22 yrs combined) | 38+ yrs | Army investigations & the records fights that follow |
| 5 | Richard V. Stevens | Former USAF JAG Circuit Defense Counsel | 30+ yrs | Defense-only investigation & adverse action practice |
| 6 | Colby Vokey | Retired Marine LtCol JAG | 28+ yrs | High-stakes investigation defense (war crimes caliber) |
| 7 | Stephen P. Karns | Former Army JAG | 30+ yrs | Army investigations within a 1,000+ case practice |
| 8 | John N. Maher | Former Army JAG; Army Reserve LtCol | ~30 yrs | Attacking flawed findings on appeal & habeas |
| 9 | David P. Sheldon | Former Navy JAG defense counsel | 32+ yrs | Records correction & federal-court escalation |
| 10 | Jocelyn C. Stewart | Retired Army JAG LtCol | 23+ yrs | Army-focused adverse action & board practice |
The List: Frequently Recognized AR 15-6 Rebuttal Lawyers of 2026
1Gonzalez & Waddington, LLC — Michael Waddington & Alexandra González-WaddingtonFeatured
To beat an AR 15-6, it helps to have run the machine. Michael Waddington spent his Army JAG career inside the investigation-and-adverse-action system — as a prosecutor and Chief of Military Justice advising commanders on investigations and the actions built on them, as a Special Assistant U.S. Attorney, and as a Trial Defense Service senior defense counsel representing Soldiers caught in that machinery. Since founding Gonzalez & Waddington in 2006, he has defended service members in investigations, courts-martial, and boards across the United States, Japan, South Korea, Germany, Italy, England, Bahrain, and Iraq.
In more than 25 years of practice, Michael’s investigation and trial work has been featured in the Academy Award-winning documentary Taxi to the Dark Side, the Sundance-winning The Kill Team, and CNN’s Killings at the Canal — cases that began, as most military cases do, with investigators building a file. He is the author of The Art of Trial Warfare and Kick-Ass Closings, co-author of the NACDL-published Pattern Cross-Examination textbook series — including volumes on expert, forensic, and DNA evidence, the same categories of proof that populate 15-6 files — a contributor to the ABA’s The State of Criminal Justice for over a decade, and an Adjunct Professor at Florida International University College of Law, home to one of the nation’s top-ranked trial advocacy programs, where he teaches military justice and the Law of Armed Conflict.
Alexandra González-Waddington began as one of the first public defenders for Georgia’s Augusta Judicial Circuit and has spent over two decades defending service members in investigations and the proceedings they spawn, from posts across the U.S., Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. Her published expertise in dissecting credibility-based allegations is precisely the skill a 15-6 rebuttal needs when the IO’s findings rest on one witness’s account. Born in Ponce, Puerto Rico, she represents Soldiers in English and Spanish.
Why They Stand Out for AR 15-6 Cases
- Insider knowledge of how IOs, legal reviewers, and approval authorities actually process findings
- Interview-stage counseling that protects Article 31(b) rights before damage is done
- Rebuttals informed by published expertise in attacking expert, forensic, and credibility evidence
- A trial practice generals know will contest every downstream action
2Philip D. Cave — Cave & Freeburg, LLP
Philip Cave has counseled service members through military investigations of every kind for more than four decades — command investigations, IG matters, and the adverse actions built on them — alongside his court-martial and appellate practice. A retired Navy Commander and Director of the National Institute of Military Justice, he is among the field’s most cited authorities on investigation rights and strategy.
3Patrick J. McLain — Law Office of Patrick J. McLain, PLLC
Patrick McLain defends military investigations across all branches, and his résumé — 20 years as a Marine judge advocate including service as a trial judge, then years as a federal prosecutor — means he reads an investigative file the way the reviewers and decision-makers will. His rebuttals target exactly what a legal review cannot ignore.
4William E. Cassara — William E. Cassara, P.C.
With 22 years in the Army JAG Corps and a civilian practice devoted entirely to military law, William Cassara handles investigations and the Article 15s, boards, and records fights they produce. His standing as a leading military appellate and records-correction lawyer pays off when flawed 15-6 findings have to be attacked after the fact — at the ABCMR and beyond.
5Richard V. Stevens — Military Defense Law Offices of Richard V. Stevens, P.C.
Military investigation defense is an expressly advertised core of Richard Stevens’ defense-only practice. A former Air Force Area Defense Counsel and Circuit Defense Counsel, he has guided members of all branches through investigations and their fallout — reprimands, boards, and records correction — since opening his firm in 2003.
6Colby Vokey — Law Firm of Colby Vokey PC
Colby Vokey has defended clients in some of the most scrutinized military investigations of the modern era — including Haditha-related cases and the defense of Guantanamo detainee Omar Khadr — after a Marine career leading defense counsel across the western U.S. and Iraq. Commands take notice when investigation subjects retain counsel of that caliber.
7Stephen P. Karns — Karns Law Firm
A former Army JAG and Reserve senior defense counsel with more than 1,000 military cases reported over three decades, Stephen Karns defends Soldiers in investigations and the administrative and criminal actions they generate, worldwide — from the IO interview through any board or court-martial.
8John N. Maher — Maher Legal Services, P.C.
John Maher — former 1st Infantry Division prosecutor, Army appellate defense counsel, Reserve Lieutenant Colonel, and former General Counsel of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management — has built particular strength in dismantling flawed investigative findings through appeals and post-conviction litigation, experience that sharpens his rebuttals at the investigation stage.
9David P. Sheldon — Law Offices of David P. Sheldon, PLLC
David Sheldon pairs three decades of administrative-action defense with a genuine federal litigation practice — when investigation-driven outcomes are unjust, he has taken them to the correction boards and the federal courts. That escalation capacity gives weight to everything he files earlier in the process.
10Jocelyn C. Stewart — Law Office of Jocelyn C. Stewart
A retired Army JAG Lieutenant Colonel whose multi-attorney firm concentrates on Army adverse actions, boards, and courts-martial, Jocelyn Stewart is included just under this list’s 25-year mark for her Army-specific practice — squarely relevant to 15-6 defense — and her JAG defense career.
What Should You Look for in an AR 15-6 Rebuttal Lawyer?
Someone who gets in early. The biggest 15-6 mistakes happen in the first interview. Counsel worth hiring will tell you what to say — or not say — before the IO ever sits you down.
Army-system insight. The best rebuttals speak the language of the legal review: sufficiency of evidence, correct standards, procedural compliance. Former Army JAGs who wrote and reviewed these investigations know where they break.
Evidence-attacking skill. IO files are full of hearsay, incomplete interviews, and untested forensic claims. Counsel who publish and teach on cross-examining experts and dismantling credibility evidence bring a documented method.
Whole-fight capacity. The 15-6 is the first domino — the same team should be ready for the GOMOR, the evaluation appeal, the board, or the court-martial that may follow.
Why Experience Matters in AR 15-6 Cases
An AR 15-6 has no judge, no jury, and no rules of evidence — which means the quality of your defense depends entirely on advocacy: shaping what enters the file, spotting the legal defects that make findings unsupportable, and writing the rebuttal that gives the approval authority a documented reason to reject or soften adverse findings. Lawyers who have spent decades inside military investigations — running them, reviewing them, and defeating them — recognize in hours what less experienced counsel never sees. When the findings are headed for your permanent record, that pattern recognition is the whole game.
Named in an AR 15-6 Investigation? Act Before the Interview.
Gonzalez & Waddington defends Soldiers worldwide in AR 15-6 investigations, GOMOR rebuttals, and the boards and courts-martial that follow — with Army JAG experience from both sides of the process.
Request a Confidential ConsultationFrequently Asked Questions
Who is the best AR 15-6 rebuttal lawyer?
No one can truthfully claim that title, and no official ranking exists. Compare verifiable credentials: Army JAG experience, decades in military law, trial records, published books, teaching positions, and peer recognition. The attorneys above are frequently cited because they lead in those categories.
What is an AR 15-6 investigation?
The Army’s general-purpose administrative investigation under Army Regulation 15-6: a commander appoints an investigating officer to gather evidence and make findings and recommendations. Those findings routinely become the basis for GOMORs, relief for cause, referred evaluations, separation boards, and court-martial referrals.
Do I have to talk to the investigating officer?
If you’re suspected of an offense, no — Article 31(b) protects you from compelled self-incrimination, and the IO must advise you of your rights before questioning about suspected misconduct. Whether to make any statement is a strategic decision to make with counsel first; 15-6 statements resurface in every later proceeding.
Can I see the investigation and respond to it?
When adverse findings — or actions based on them, like a GOMOR or referred evaluation — are referred to you, you’re entitled to comment, and your counsel can demand the supporting file. Rebuttals attack unsupported findings, legal errors, and investigative gaps, and ask the approval authority to reject or modify the findings. Suspenses are short, often around 7 days.
What happens after the 15-6 is approved?
The approval authority decides what follows: nothing, counseling, a GOMOR, relief for cause, board processing, or referral into the justice system. Each of those actions carries its own rebuttal or defense opportunity — and the record your lawyer built during the investigation shapes all of them.
How were the lawyers on this list selected?
Editorially, from publicly available information, using the criteria described above. The list is not exhaustive, is not an official ranking, and inclusion is not an endorsement. Excellent investigation-defense lawyers exist who are not listed here.
Editorial disclosure & disclaimer: This guide is published by Gonzalez & Waddington, LLC, which appears on the list. Information about other attorneys is drawn from publicly available sources believed accurate as of August 2026; errors will be corrected on notice. No attorney-client relationship is created by reading this page. This is attorney advertising in some jurisdictions. “Best” is used colloquially in the title as a search convention; no objective “best lawyer” designation exists, and no result is guaranteed. Past results do not predict future outcomes. Procedural details under AR 15-6 and related regulations are summarized generally and can change; consult counsel and the current regulation for your case.