Licensed in Georgia Former Army JAG and Senior Defense Counsel 25+ years defending service members Courts-martial defense worldwide
Reviewed by Michael Waddington, Founding Partner Updated October 8, 2026
Gonzalez & Waddington defends Airmen and other service members at Moody Air Force Base, Valdosta, Georgia in courts-martial, felony-level UCMJ charges, and Article 120 sexual assault allegations from investigation through verdict.
Attorneys Michael Waddington and Alexandra Gonzalez-Waddington provide aggressive civilian defense for personnel at Moody AFB — home of the 23rd Wing, 347th Rescue Group, and 820th Base Defense Group — and travel to Valdosta and installations worldwide. OSI opens investigations quickly after an allegation surfaces at Moody, and command timelines at this operationally active base can move a service member from rights advisement to charge sheet before independent counsel has been consulted.
Cases at Moody AFB commonly involve Article 120 sexual assault charges, violent offenses, drug allegations, and misconduct tied to off-post conduct in Valdosta or surrounding Lowndes County, where civilian police reports and local witnesses can run alongside a military investigation. Proximity to Robins AFB, Fort Stewart, Fort Benning, Fort Gordon, and MCLB Albany means multi-installation and multi-command cases arise, each with separate decision makers and overlapping deadlines.
Contact Gonzalez & Waddington at 1-800-921-8607 for a free, confidential consultation about your situation at Moody AFB.
Facing an OSI investigation, Article 120 allegation, or court-martial at Moody Air Force Base? Gonzalez & Waddington is a civilian military defense firm representing Airmen and other service members in serious UCMJ matters. Michael Waddington, a former Army JAG defense counsel, and Alexandra González-Waddington, a Georgia-licensed criminal defense lawyer, represent clients in military courts worldwide. Call 800-921-8607 to request a confidential, no-cost consultation.
If you have been called into an interview, received a rights advisement, learned that your phone may be searched, or been served with a charge sheet, the immediate question is what to do next. You can contact defense counsel before deciding whether to make a statement or consent to a search. Preserve relevant records and give your lawyer the exact paperwork and deadlines. The sooner counsel understands the allegation and the evidence, the more useful the advice can be.
First, find out whether you are being questioned as a suspect, witness, or subject of an administrative inquiry. Do not guess what an interview invitation means. If a military investigator or command representative suspects you of an offense, Article 31 of the UCMJ provides protection against compulsory self-incrimination and requires warnings in specified circumstances. Other rules may apply when civilian police are involved. Ask for a lawyer before making a decision about an interview, written statement, consent search, or device access. Do not lie, destroy evidence, or disregard a lawful order.
Second, preserve material that might matter. Save complete message threads, call logs, photos, receipts, rideshare records, travel records, and the names of people who were present. Do not contact the reporting person or witnesses to “clear things up” before discussing that step with counsel, particularly if you have a no-contact order. Tell your lawyer about devices already seized, passwords requested, accounts shared with another person, and any personal records that could disappear under routine deletion settings. Preservation helps the defense test the entire timeline instead of relying on selected screenshots or recollections.
Third, identify every active track. A single allegation can produce an OSI or Security Forces investigation, a command inquiry, a civilian police report, an Article 15 proposal, a separation action, or a court-martial referral. These tracks have different deadlines and decision makers. A response written for one process may become relevant to another. Send counsel every notice you receive, including a letter of reprimand, rights advisement, search authorization, charge sheet, or administrative separation notification.
Contacting counsel is useful even when no charges have been filed. An investigation may end without prosecution, but counsel can still help identify urgent evidence, explain your rights, and prepare for a response deadline. No page can determine whether you should give a statement in your particular case. That decision depends on the facts, the evidence already collected, and the exact request being made.
Moody Air Force Base is near Valdosta in south Georgia. Its host 23d Wing combines attack, rescue, and support missions; the 93d Air Ground Operations Wing is also based at Moody. These facts matter because witnesses, records, and duty schedules may be spread across flying squadrons, ground operations units, support organizations, deployed locations, and civilian communities outside the installation. The base name alone does not predict the charge or outcome. A defense investigation must follow the people and records connected to the particular allegation.
The 347th Rescue Group includes the 38th Rescue Squadron, 41st Rescue Squadron, 71st Rescue Squadron, and 347th Operations Support Squadron. Their personnel work with Guardian Angel, HH-60W, and HC-130J missions. The 93d Air Ground Operations Wing supports air-ground operations, including deployable ground capabilities. Moody’s 23d Mission Support Group includes functions such as security forces, contracting, and personnel support. These unit descriptions identify possible sources of duty records or witnesses; they do not imply that any unit has an unusual rate of misconduct.
In a flying or rescue unit, relevant records might include crew schedules, training calendars, travel orders, duty logs, access records, or communications during an exercise. In a security forces or ground operations case, shift rosters, dispatch logs, training records, body-worn or fixed-camera footage where available, and equipment records may matter. A contracting or financial allegation may turn on purchase approvals, email chains, and the difference between a policy mistake and criminal intent. Counsel should request and evaluate records based on the allegation, not assume that every mission-related document is relevant or obtainable.
Many events occur outside the gate. A case may involve Valdosta, another south Georgia community, travel through Florida, or a deployment location. That can create civilian witnesses, private-business records, local police reports, and state-law questions alongside a military inquiry. Being off base does not, by itself, remove a service member from UCMJ jurisdiction. Nor does a civilian investigation automatically stop a military case. The location, duty status, charged conduct, and applicable law must be assessed separately.
Local knowledge is most useful when it helps preserve specific evidence and understand the client’s duties. A deployment or reassignment may make a witness harder to find. Digital records may be overwritten. An allegation can affect access to a flight line, weapons, classified information, or a duty position before any charge is filed. These are case-specific possibilities, not automatic consequences at Moody. Tell counsel promptly about any restriction, suspended credential, temporary reassignment, or upcoming movement so it can be considered in the defense plan.
The Department of the Air Force Office of Special Investigations, commonly called OSI, investigates serious allegations involving Air Force personnel. Security Forces may respond to incidents, secure a scene, gather initial information, or refer a matter for further investigation. Depending on where an event happened, local or state law enforcement may also be involved. An investigator’s request for an interview is not a court summons, but the situation may carry legal and professional consequences. Get individual advice before responding.
An investigation can include interviews, digital-device examination, account records, medical or forensic material, photographs, location information, and command records. Each item has limits. A screenshot may leave out the conversation before and after it. Location data may place a device somewhere without proving who carried it. A witness may remember an event differently after discussing it with others. An expert conclusion may depend on assumptions or incomplete source material. Defense counsel’s job is to obtain the underlying information where available, test alternative explanations, and avoid treating either a favorable or unfavorable fragment as the complete story.
Search issues can be especially important in phone and account cases. The defense may need to examine the legal basis for a search, the scope of any authorization or consent, how a device was handled, and whether the extracted data were interpreted accurately. A service member should not delete files or reset a device. If investigators ask for a password or consent, the legally sound response depends on the circumstances; counsel can advise on the actual request and any applicable order.
Where a case also involves civilian police, the defense needs to know whether interviews, warrants, evidence transfers, or charges occurred in either system. Military and civilian authorities can both have interests in conduct involving a service member. The proper strategy may require coordination across proceedings. Do not assume that a decision by one authority decides what the other will do.
Article 120 cases often depend on disputed facts about conduct, consent, capacity, identification, or timing. Some cases involve alcohol, a prior relationship, or messages that the parties interpret differently. A fair defense requires close attention to the charged statutory elements and the full evidence. Counsel may examine interviews, communications, medical records, forensic reports, digital data, and the opportunity each witness had to observe or remember events. The seriousness of an allegation does not eliminate the presumption of innocence or the government’s burden of proof.
Sexual offense cases can carry substantial confinement and discharge exposure if convicted, but the exact maximum punishment depends on the offense, charged date, forum, and applicable law. Registration consequences also depend on the conviction and governing registration rules; they should not be described as automatic for every Article 120 allegation. Counsel should explain the actual exposure on the charge sheet rather than rely on a generic list of penalties.
Allegations under Articles 128, 128b, 130, or other provisions may involve overlapping relationship, family, or command issues. Relevant evidence can include messages, photographs, 911 or dispatch records, medical documentation, witness accounts, and earlier reports. A military protective order or civilian protective order may impose immediate restrictions. Violating an order can create a separate problem even while the underlying allegation is disputed. Give counsel every order and ask for clear guidance about contact, housing, children, and travel.
Other cases may involve Article 112a drug allegations, Article 121 larceny, Article 107 false official statements, Article 92 order violations, fraud, unauthorized computer access, or offenses charged under Article 134. The label of an offense does not tell the whole story. A positive test raises questions about collection, custody, testing, and knowledge. A financial case may require reconstructing approvals and intent. A digital case may require identifying who controlled an account or device and when. A statement case turns on the precise words, context, materiality where required, and proof of intent.
Some allegations are better addressed through an administrative or nonjudicial route, while others may be referred to a court-martial. No specific charge is inevitable because of a person’s unit, rank, or base. The evidence and lawful decision process control. The firm’s role is to assess the individual matter, protect the client’s rights, and prepare a response that accounts for both criminal and career consequences.
The answer depends on the offense and date. For certain covered offenses committed on or after December 28, 2023, the Department of the Air Force’s Office of Special Trial Counsel has independent disposition authority. Its published list includes rape and sexual assault, domestic violence, murder, child sexual offenses, stalking, and other specified crimes. Special Trial Counsel, rather than the local commander acting alone, makes key court-martial decisions for these covered offenses. Older explanations that say the Moody command decides every serious criminal case are incomplete.
Commands still have important roles, including safety measures, duty decisions, administrative actions, and input in the military justice process. In noncovered cases, command and convening-authority decisions remain central. Whether Special Trial Counsel has authority over related or other alleged misconduct requires review of the current rules. A defense lawyer should identify the correct decision maker and the evidence that decision maker will receive. That matters when considering written submissions, witness interviews, and the timing of a defense presentation.
Preferral is the formal signing of charges. It is not a finding of guilt, and it does not mean a trial date is fixed. A lawyer first reviews the exact specifications, alleged dates, elements, and possible punishments. The defense also looks at whether the allegations match the investigative record and whether the government has preserved material that might favor the accused.
Before a general court-martial is referred, an Article 32 preliminary hearing is generally required, subject to statutory exceptions. The hearing addresses issues such as probable cause, jurisdiction, charge form, and a recommended disposition. It is not a full trial. Depending on the case, the defense may use it to examine evidence, clarify the government’s theory, and create a record. Counsel should also explain what the hearing cannot accomplish under the current rules.
After referral, pretrial litigation may concern discovery, witness access, expert assistance, statements, search evidence, or the admissibility of particular proof. Motions should be tied to a real legal issue and the facts available. Some cases involve plea negotiations; others require a contested trial. The accused should receive a candid assessment of both routes. The government’s burden at trial is proof beyond a reasonable doubt, and the defense has no duty to prove innocence.
The UCMJ recognizes summary, special, and general courts-martial. Their procedures and sentencing authority differ. The forum, offense, and date of conduct affect potential punishment. At trial, the judge rules on law, while fact finding may be by members or, when permitted and elected, a military judge. A sentence, post-trial rights, and appellate review depend on the result and applicable rules. Counsel should walk through the actual case rather than assume every charge follows the same path.
Time matters, but there is no universal Moody AFB clock under which a case automatically reaches trial. Investigations can be short or long, and operational schedules, evidence processing, charging decisions, and litigation affect the timeline. If someone claims that an allegation must be resolved within a fixed number of days, ask which law or written order sets that deadline. Keep track of dates on notices you have actually received.
In a general or special court-martial, Article 38 provides for detailed military defense counsel and allows an accused to be represented by civilian counsel retained at the accused’s expense. A request for a particular military counsel may also be possible if that lawyer is reasonably available. Hiring civilian counsel generally allows both lawyers to work as a defense team. They should agree on responsibilities, information sharing, client communication, and who will handle each hearing.
Moody has an Area Defense Counsel (ADC) office. The Air Force describes the ADC as independent of the local command and responsible for protecting the individual client’s interests. The office can address various adverse actions, and it is an important resource for Airmen. Gonzalez & Waddington is a private firm, separate from the ADC and the Air Force. A client can ask both counsel how they would coordinate if the client retains civilian representation.
When comparing lawyers, ask who will personally handle the investigation or trial, whether that lawyer has litigated the type of charge involved, how travel and experts are handled, and what services the fee includes. Ask how quickly counsel can review current deadlines and how updates will be given. Specific answers are more useful than labels such as “aggressive” or promises about a result. No ethical lawyer can guarantee dismissal, acquittal, retention, or a particular sentence.
Michael Waddington is a civilian military defense attorney and former Army judge advocate. He served as a Trial Defense Service senior defense counsel and has experience in prosecution and military justice positions. He represents service members in courts-martial and related investigations and has written and taught on military criminal defense and trial advocacy. Those roles inform how he examines a case from the first investigator contact through trial preparation.
Alexandra González-Waddington is a founding partner and civilian military defense lawyer. She previously worked as a public defender in Georgia and is admitted in Georgia and Florida. Her published practice includes defending service members facing sexual assault, violent, and financial allegations in military courts. She and Michael work on serious criminal defense matters, including cases that require close review of witness accounts and digital evidence. Her biography provides additional information on her background and admissions.
The firm represents military clients worldwide, including service members assigned to Moody AFB. That means a prospective client should discuss travel, hearing appearances, and the division of work between civilian and detailed counsel during the consultation.
A UCMJ investigation does not always result in a court-martial. Depending on the evidence and applicable rules, an Airman may receive a letter of reprimand, a proposed Article 15, an adverse evaluation, or administrative separation paperwork. Officers may face different administrative procedures. Each action has its own response period, evidentiary standard, and possible career effect. The fact that a matter is “administrative” does not make the response unimportant.
For an Article 15, counsel can help the member understand the election and response options, review the alleged misconduct, identify mitigating or exculpatory evidence, and assess possible effects on grade, pay, duty, and career. In a separation case, counsel can review the stated basis, service characterization at issue, and any right to a board. Decisions in these processes can interact with an open criminal inquiry. A written explanation that seems helpful for one purpose may create risk elsewhere, so counsel should know every pending action before a response is filed.
Other consequences can arise before or without a conviction: temporary removal from duties, a security clearance review, professional licensing questions, or a travel restriction. Whether any of these applies is fact dependent. Counsel should separate what has actually happened from what someone fears might happen, then prioritize concrete deadlines and evidence needs.
The first step is a private, detailed chronology. Counsel needs the client’s account, the precise allegation, dates, locations, people involved, and all available documents. That includes facts that may be uncomfortable or appear unfavorable. Surprise evidence is harder to address than evidence discussed early and confidentially. If there are multiple events or overlapping civilian matters, the chronology should keep them separate until the records show a connection.
Next comes evidence preservation and collection. Counsel may identify witnesses, request records, evaluate whether a forensic expert is needed, and examine whether the government has disclosed favorable material. A defense theory should emerge from tested facts. It may focus on identity, intent, consent, reliability, an element the government cannot prove, a legal violation, or mitigation. In some cases the best early work is quiet fact gathering; in others a timely submission to a decision maker may be important. There is no universal script.
Finally, the client needs decision points explained in plain language. What is known? What is still missing? What could happen under each forum or administrative route? What choices belong to the client? A useful defense plan should change when credible new evidence appears. Trial readiness means preparing to litigate when appropriate, while also evaluating lawful alternatives with the client’s goals in mind.
OSI wants to talk to you. An interview request from the Air Force Office of Special Investigations (OSI) at Moody AFB is evidence collection, not a chance to clear things up. Article 31(b) of the UCMJ requires investigators to tell you what you are suspected of and that you have the right to remain silent before they question you, and you can ask for a lawyer before answering anything. Exercising those rights cannot be used as evidence against you.
Being titled is not the same as being charged. Investigators can title a service member and index the name in the Defense Central Index of Investigations on only "credible information." The case may go nowhere, yet the entry can resurface years later in background investigations and clearance reviews, so how the investigation is handled from the start matters.
Your commander may not be the one deciding. Covered offenses such as sexual assault, domestic violence, stalking, kidnapping, murder, child pornography and (since 2025) sexual harassment are now controlled by an independent Office of Special Trial Counsel, which decides whether charges are preferred and referred. Other allegations at Moody AFB still go through the chain of command.
Domestic violence allegations. Article 128b covers violence against a spouse, intimate partner or family member, and an allegation of strangulation or suffocation can be charged as aggravated assault even without a visible injury. A qualifying conviction can also trigger the federal firearms ban under the Lautenberg Amendment, which can end a career that requires carrying a weapon.
Drug allegations. Article 112a of the UCMJ applies to service members at Moody AFB on post and off, separately from Georgia law. A positive urinalysis is serious but contestable: the chain of custody, the testing process and innocent ingestion can all be challenged, and the government must prove the use was knowing and wrongful.
Pay and allowance allegations. BAH and other allowance cases are usually charged as larceny under Article 121 or as frauds against the United States under Article 124. An overpayment by itself is not a crime: the government must prove you intended to steal or defraud, and many of these cases begin as paperwork errors.
If you are under investigation at Moody AFB, talk to a military defense lawyer before you make any statement. Call Gonzalez & Waddington at 1-800-921-8607.
Being falsely accused of sexual assault and domestic violence was the most difficult experience of my life. Overnight, my freedom, military career, reputation, and future were all on the line.
Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Every case is different.
No. An interview request, search, rights advisement, or command notification is enough reason to seek advice. Early counsel can help preserve records and explain choices before an avoidable decision changes the evidence.
No. Gonzalez & Waddington is a civilian firm based in Florida that represents service members at installations worldwide, including Moody. Ask the firm how it would handle meetings, travel, and appearances in your matter.
No. Moody’s ADC page states that the office represents individual clients and operates independently from local command and supervision chains. Its services and eligibility should be confirmed directly with the office.
In a general or special court-martial, the UCMJ generally permits retained civilian counsel alongside detailed military counsel. The precise representation arrangement should be discussed with both lawyers. Other proceedings may have different rules.
Yes, off-base location alone does not remove a person who is subject to the UCMJ from military jurisdiction. Civilian authorities may also investigate or prosecute conduct under applicable law. The details require individual review.
No. An allegation triggers an investigative and decision process, but referral is not automatic. For covered offenses within its authority, the Air Force Office of Special Trial Counsel decides whether court-martial is warranted. The evidence and governing rules determine what happens next.
It might or it might not. The answer depends on what investigators know, the proposed questions, and your particular facts. Article 31 rights may apply. Speak with defense counsel before deciding whether to participate in a suspect interview.
Bring or securely provide notices, charge sheets, interview requests, orders, search paperwork, relevant communications, a timeline, and upcoming deadlines. Tell counsel about any civilian police contact, protective order, deployment, or administrative action. Do not alter or delete original material.
The firm’s current Moody page advertises a confidential, no-cost consultation. Retained representation is a separate engagement, and the scope and fee should be confirmed directly with the firm.
No. Article 31(b) of the UCMJ requires investigators to tell you what you are suspected of and that you have the right to remain silent, and you can ask for a lawyer before answering anything. An interview is evidence collection, and OSI can title you as a subject on a low "credible information" standard that can follow you into background and clearance checks even if the case is dropped. Politely decline, ask for counsel, and call a military defense lawyer before you say anything.
If you are stationed at Moody Air Force Base and facing a UCMJ investigation, Article 120 allegation, court-martial, or related adverse action, contact Gonzalez & Waddington at 800-921-8607. Explain what happened, what documents you have received, and the next deadline. The firm can discuss whether it can represent you and what immediate steps fit your case.
This video explains what your rights are and how experienced criminal defense lawyers can make a difference.
Facing a military investigation, UCMJ allegation, or serious criminal charge? Gonzalez & Waddington provides trial-focused defense for high-stakes cases. Call 1-800-921-8607 or text 954-799-4019 for a confidential, no-cost consultation.
