Searching for the Best Article 15 / NJP Lawyer?
There is no official or objectively determinable “best Article 15 lawyer” or “best NJP attorney.” This guide explains how service members can evaluate civilian military lawyers using verifiable experience, professional background, trial practice, publications, teaching, and experience handling nonjudicial punishment and related military actions.
Important disclosure: Service members frequently search online for the “best Article 15 lawyer,” “best NJP lawyer,” “best Captain’s Mast lawyer,” or similar terms. There is no official, objective, or universally accepted ranking of attorneys who handle nonjudicial punishment matters. This page does not rank the attorneys discussed below and does not state or imply that one lawyer is superior to another.
Lawyers discussed on this page are identified for informational purposes using publicly available information concerning potentially relevant and verifiable factors such as prior military legal service, years of practice, stated areas of practice, publications, teaching, and professional background.
Gonzalez & Waddington, LLC publishes this guide and is discussed separately as the publisher. Inclusion or omission of another attorney does not constitute an endorsement, criticism, certification, or determination concerning that attorney’s quality. The list is not exhaustive. No result is guaranteed.
Key Takeaways
- There is no objectively determinable “best Article 15 lawyer.” Compare actual experience and qualifications rather than rankings or marketing labels.
- The decision whether to accept NJP can be important. Depending on the service member’s status and circumstances, accepting nonjudicial punishment or demanding trial by court-martial may present significantly different risks and consequences.
- The right to refuse NJP is not universal. Article 15 contains an exception for a member attached to or embarked in a vessel. Service regulations and individual circumstances should be reviewed before making the decision.
- An Article 15 can affect more than the punishment imposed that day. Depending on the branch, rank, underlying misconduct, and disposition, NJP may affect evaluations, promotions, assignments, retention, administrative separation, and other personnel actions.
- Deadlines can be short. Obtain advice early enough to review the evidence and understand the choices available in the specific case.
Why Does This Page Use the Phrase “Best Article 15 Lawyer”?
People looking for civilian military counsel often phrase their search as “Who is the best Article 15 lawyer?” or “Who is the best NJP attorney?” The word best is used on this page to address that consumer question—not as a representation that any particular attorney or law firm can objectively be designated the best.
A more useful question is: Which lawyer has the experience, background, availability, strategy, and approach that fit this particular NJP matter?
What Is Article 15 / Nonjudicial Punishment?
Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice authorizes commanders to impose certain forms of nonjudicial punishment for minor offenses without a court-martial. The process is commonly called an Article 15 in the Army and Air Force, Captain’s Mast in the Navy and Coast Guard, and Office Hours in the Marine Corps.
NJP is different from a court-martial. The procedures, available punishment, paperwork, filing consequences, hearing practices, and collateral effects can vary by service, rank, type of proceeding, and individual circumstances.
The governing federal statute is Article 15, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 815 .
For a general overview, see: Article 15s: A Guide for Military Service Members .
Can You Refuse an Article 15 and Demand Trial?
Article 15 generally provides that, before punishment is imposed, a service member may demand trial by court-martial instead of accepting NJP. However, federal law contains an important exception for a member attached to or embarked in a vessel.
The decision should not be reduced to “always take the Article 15” or “always demand trial.” The appropriate choice depends on factors such as:
- The strength of the government’s evidence
- The seriousness of the alleged misconduct
- The punishment potentially available at NJP
- The potential exposure if charges are later referred to court-martial
- The service member’s rank and career position
- Potential administrative-separation consequences
- Potential effects on evaluations, promotions, assignments, or retention
- Whether the service member is attached to or embarked in a vessel
- The applicable service regulations and command circumstances
Do Not Treat Refusing NJP as a Tactical Trick
A demand for trial does not guarantee that the government will abandon the case. The command may consider other authorized dispositions, including court-martial action where appropriate. Conversely, accepting NJP does not necessarily mean admitting that every allegation is true. The decision should be made only after evaluating the evidence, available rights, possible punishment, and potential downstream consequences.
How to Evaluate an Article 15 / NJP Lawyer
Rather than relying on descriptions such as “best,” “top,” or “leading,” service members can evaluate facts that can actually be investigated and compared.
Civilian Lawyers With Publicly Documented Military-Law Backgrounds
The following attorneys are included for informational purposes. They are not ranked. Names are presented alphabetically by surname. Inclusion does not mean that one attorney is better qualified than another, and the list is not an exhaustive directory of lawyers who handle Article 15 or NJP matters.
| Attorney / Firm | Publicly Reported Background | Potentially Relevant Areas |
|---|---|---|
| William E. Cassara | Former Army JAG; military-law practice | Military justice, appeals, administrative matters, discharge issues, and records correction |
| Philip D. Cave | Retired Navy JAG Commander | Military justice, NJP-related matters, administrative proceedings, and appeals |
| Stephen P. Karns | Former Army JAG | Military criminal defense, Article 15 matters, and administrative military matters |
| John N. Maher | Former Army JAG and Army Reserve officer | Military justice, appellate work, and administrative military matters |
| Patrick J. McLain | Former Marine judge advocate and military judge | Courts-martial, NJP-related matters, administrative boards, and military proceedings |
| David P. Sheldon | Former Navy defense counsel | Military justice, administrative actions, correction-board matters, and federal litigation |
| Richard V. Stevens | Former Air Force JAG defense counsel | Military investigations, courts-martial, NJP matters, and administrative adverse actions |
| Jocelyn C. Stewart | Retired Army JAG Lieutenant Colonel | Article 15 matters, administrative boards, military investigations, and courts-martial |
| Colby Vokey | Retired Marine Lieutenant Colonel JAG | Military investigations, NJP matters, courts-martial, and criminal defense |
About the Publisher: Gonzalez & Waddington, LLC
Gonzalez & Waddington, LLC — Michael Waddington & Alexandra González-Waddington Publisher
Gonzalez & Waddington publishes UCMJDefense.com and represents U.S. service members in military investigations, nonjudicial punishment matters, administrative actions, courts-martial, and related military proceedings.
Michael Waddington previously served as an Army JAG prosecutor, Chief of Military Justice, Special Assistant United States Attorney, and Army defense counsel. His civilian practice has included representation of service members in military investigations, administrative proceedings, courts-martial, and other military matters in the United States and overseas.
Michael has practiced law for more than 25 years. His professional work includes military-justice teaching, continuing legal education programs, and published books concerning trial advocacy, cross-examination, expert testimony, digital forensics, DNA evidence, and related evidentiary subjects.
Alexandra González-Waddington began her legal career as a public defender in Georgia and has spent more than two decades handling criminal-defense and military matters. She has represented service members in the United States and overseas and practices in English and Spanish.
Experience Potentially Relevant to Article 15 / NJP Matters
- Advice concerning whether to accept NJP or exercise available rights
- Evaluation of investigative reports, statements, digital evidence, and credibility issues
- Preparation of matters in defense, extenuation, and mitigation
- Experience with reprimands, adverse evaluations, administrative boards, and separation matters
- Court-martial experience relevant when trial is a potential alternative disposition
Additional Civilian Military Lawyers Listed Alphabetically
The profiles below summarize publicly available professional information. They are presented alphabetically and do not constitute a ranking, endorsement, or comparison of relative quality.
William E. Cassara — William E. Cassara, P.C.
Publicly available professional materials identify William Cassara as a former Army JAG attorney whose military-law practice includes military justice, appellate matters, discharge issues, records correction, and other military administrative matters.
Philip D. Cave — Cave & Freeburg, LLP
Publicly available professional information identifies Philip Cave as a longtime military-law practitioner whose reported practice includes courts-martial, appellate matters, nonjudicial punishment issues, administrative proceedings, and other military matters.
Stephen P. Karns — Law Offices of Stephen P. Karns
Public professional biographies identify Stephen Karns as a former Army JAG officer and Army Reserve defense counsel. His reported practice includes military criminal defense, Article 15 matters, and administrative military matters involving service members in the United States and overseas.
John N. Maher — Maher Legal Services, P.C.
Public professional information identifies John Maher as a former Army prosecutor and appellate defense counsel. His reported practice includes military justice, administrative matters, appellate proceedings, and related representation.
Patrick J. McLain — Law Office of Patrick J. McLain, PLLC
Patrick McLain’s public professional biography identifies him as a former Marine Corps military judge, Marine judge advocate, and federal prosecutor. His reported military practice includes courts-martial, nonjudicial punishment matters, administrative boards, and other military proceedings.
David P. Sheldon — Law Offices of David P. Sheldon, PLLC
Public professional information identifies David Sheldon as a former Navy defense lawyer whose reported practice includes military justice, administrative military actions, correction-board proceedings, and federal litigation involving military clients.
Richard V. Stevens — Military Defense Law Offices of Richard V. Stevens, P.C.
Publicly available professional materials identify Richard Stevens as a former active-duty Air Force JAG attorney. His reported practice includes Article 15 and NJP matters, military investigations, courts-martial, administrative separation proceedings, and related adverse actions.
Jocelyn C. Stewart — Law Office of Jocelyn C. Stewart
Public professional information identifies Jocelyn Stewart as a retired Army JAG Lieutenant Colonel. Her firm’s reported practice includes Article 15 matters, military investigations, administrative separation proceedings, boards, and courts-martial.
Colby Vokey — Law Firm of Colby Vokey PC
Colby Vokey’s public professional biography identifies him as a retired Marine Lieutenant Colonel who served as both a military prosecutor and defense counsel. His reported practice includes military investigations, NJP matters, courts-martial, and criminal defense.
What Should You Look for in an Article 15 / NJP Lawyer?
Experience Evaluating the Accept-or-Refuse Decision
Ask how counsel evaluates the government’s evidence and the potential consequences of each available option. A lawyer should be able to explain both the possible benefits and risks of accepting NJP and, when legally available, demanding trial by court-martial.
Actual Court-Martial Experience
If demanding trial is a realistic option, the lawyer should understand the court-martial system that could follow. Ask about actual experience defending contested military trials rather than relying on generalized descriptions of military-law experience.
Familiarity With Your Branch
The Uniform Code of Military Justice provides the basic authority for NJP, but the services implement nonjudicial punishment through their own regulations and procedures. Army Article 15 practice, Air Force NJP procedures, Navy and Coast Guard Captain’s Mast, and Marine Corps Office Hours should not automatically be treated as identical.
Experience Analyzing Evidence
The case may involve witness statements, investigative reports, text messages, photographs, videos, emails, social-media records, digital evidence, medical records, urinalysis evidence, or other documentation. Ask what evidence counsel will personally review.
Understanding of Follow-On Administrative Actions
Alleged misconduct can produce consequences beyond NJP itself. Depending on the circumstances, those issues can include adverse evaluations, reprimands, promotion consequences, administrative separation, Boards of Inquiry, QMP-related issues, security-clearance concerns, or records-correction proceedings.
Who Will Actually Handle the Case?
Determine who will review the evidence, communicate with you, prepare written submissions, develop the presentation, and advise you regarding any appeal or later proceeding.
What Can an Article 15 / NJP Lawyer Do?
The scope of representation depends on the service, type of NJP, procedural posture, and individual case. Depending on the circumstances, counsel may assist with:
- Reviewing the allegations and available evidence
- Explaining the maximum punishment potentially available at NJP
- Evaluating whether a right to demand trial exists
- Comparing the risks of NJP and potential court-martial proceedings
- Identifying factual weaknesses and inconsistencies
- Evaluating witness credibility and motive
- Collecting documents, records, photographs, messages, or other evidence
- Identifying favorable witnesses
- Preparing matters in defense
- Preparing evidence in extenuation and mitigation
- Preparing the service member for the commander’s hearing or presentation
- Advising concerning an appeal
- Preparing for potential administrative consequences
See also: Defending Against Article 15 Charges: Strategies for Success .
Army Article 15 Deadlines: Why Early Advice Matters
Procedures vary by service, but Army practice illustrates why a service member should seek advice quickly. Army guidance describes a reasonable decision period for a formal Article 15, commonly about 48 hours, although the appropriate period can depend on factors such as case complexity and counsel availability.
Army guidance also provides an appeal process. An appeal submitted more than five calendar days after punishment is imposed may be presumed untimely unless the superior authority accepts it for good cause.
Those Army timeframes should not automatically be applied to another service or to every NJP proceeding. The applicable service regulation and paperwork should be checked in the individual case.
Can an Article 15 Affect Your Military Career?
Potential effects depend on the branch, rank, punishment, filing decision, underlying allegations, personnel policies, and the service member’s individual record.
Depending on those circumstances, an NJP or the underlying misconduct may become relevant to issues such as:
- Promotion
- Assignments
- Evaluations
- Reenlistment or retention
- Administrative separation
- Officer elimination or Boards of Inquiry
- Qualification for particular duties
- Security-clearance matters
- Later administrative or disciplinary proceedings
The existence of an Article 15 does not mean that every one of these consequences will occur. Counsel should evaluate the realistic consequences based on the member’s service, grade, record, alleged misconduct, punishment, and applicable personnel regulations.
Offered an Article 15 or NJP?
Gonzalez & Waddington represents service members in Article 15 matters, Captain’s Mast, Office Hours, military investigations, administrative actions, and courts-martial. If you are deciding whether to accept NJP, preparing a presentation, or facing possible follow-on action, you can contact the firm to discuss the circumstances of your case.
Request a Confidential ConsultationFrequently Asked Questions
Who is the best Article 15 lawyer?
There is no official or objectively determinable “best Article 15 lawyer.” A service member can instead compare verifiable factors such as prior military legal positions, years handling military matters, Article 15 or NJP experience, court-martial experience, administrative defense experience, publications, teaching, availability, and the lawyer’s proposed strategy for the particular case.
Who is the best NJP lawyer?
There is no objective ranking that determines the best NJP lawyer for every case. The appropriate lawyer depends on the branch of service, allegations, evidence, potential punishment, possible administrative consequences, and the lawyer’s relevant experience and approach.
Is this page a ranking of Article 15 or NJP attorneys?
No. The attorneys identified on this page are not ranked. The informational list of other lawyers is presented alphabetically. Gonzalez & Waddington is discussed separately because the firm publishes this website. Inclusion or omission is not an endorsement or criticism.
What is an Article 15?
Article 15 of the UCMJ authorizes commanders to impose certain disciplinary punishment for minor offenses without a court-martial. The procedures and potential punishments vary depending on factors including the service, grade of the commander, grade of the service member, and type of NJP.
Is Article 15 the same as NJP?
Article 15 is the provision of the Uniform Code of Military Justice authorizing nonjudicial punishment. The Army and Air Force commonly use the term Article 15. The Navy and Coast Guard commonly use the term Captain’s Mast, while the Marine Corps uses the term Office Hours.
Can I refuse an Article 15?
Under Article 15, a service member generally may demand trial by court-martial before NJP is imposed. Federal law contains an exception for a member attached to or embarked in a vessel. Service regulations and individual circumstances should be reviewed before relying on the right to refuse NJP.
What happens if I refuse an Article 15?
Refusing NJP does not automatically end the case and does not guarantee that a court-martial will occur. The appropriate authority determines what further disposition, if any, is authorized. Because court-martial proceedings can carry substantially different consequences from NJP, the decision should be made after reviewing the evidence and obtaining individualized legal advice.
How long do I have to decide whether to accept an Army Article 15?
In Army formal Article 15 proceedings, guidance generally provides a reasonable period in which to consult with counsel and decide whether to demand trial. Army materials describe approximately 48 hours as a common reasonable period, but the actual period can vary based on circumstances such as case complexity and counsel availability. The controlling paperwork and current regulation should be checked in the particular case.
Can I have a lawyer at an Article 15 hearing?
The answer depends on the service, type of NJP, governing regulations, and the role counsel is permitted to play. For example, Army procedures permit consultation with counsel and provide mechanisms for requesting a spokesperson, but an NJP hearing is not the same as an adversarial court-martial trial. A civilian lawyer may still assist extensively before the hearing by reviewing evidence, advising the service member, preparing matters, developing questions and issues, and preparing the overall presentation.
Can I present evidence at an Article 15?
Procedures vary, but NJP processes generally provide opportunities for the service member to present matters to the imposing commander. Depending on the applicable rules, those matters may include documentary evidence, witness information, defense evidence, extenuation, mitigation, and other relevant information.
Can I appeal an Article 15?
Article 15 provides a right to appeal punishment to the next superior authority on the ground that the punishment is unjust or disproportionate. The applicable service regulation controls the procedures and timing. In Army practice, an appeal submitted more than five calendar days after punishment is imposed may be presumed untimely unless accepted for good cause.
Is an Article 15 a criminal conviction?
Nonjudicial punishment is not a court-martial conviction. However, the existence of NJP or the underlying misconduct may have significant military personnel and administrative consequences depending on the circumstances.
Can an Article 15 lead to administrative separation?
It can be relevant to later administrative action, but separation does not automatically follow every Article 15. Whether separation processing is initiated depends on the misconduct, service regulations, rank, prior record, command decisions, and other circumstances.
Why does this page use the phrase “best Article 15 lawyer”?
People frequently use phrases such as “best Article 15 lawyer” or “best NJP lawyer” when searching online for experienced military counsel. This page addresses that search question while expressly explaining that no official or objective best-lawyer ranking exists.
Related Article 15 / NJP Resources
- Article 15s: A Guide for Military Service Members
- Defending Against Article 15 Charges: Strategies for Success
- Can You Beat an Article 15? Realistic Outcomes and Defense Strategies
- Contact Gonzalez & Waddington
Attorney advertising and editorial disclosure: This page is published by Gonzalez & Waddington, LLC. Gonzalez & Waddington is discussed on this page because it is the publisher. The page is educational and promotional in nature and may constitute attorney advertising.
The phrases “best Article 15 lawyer,” “best NJP lawyer,” “best Captain’s Mast lawyer,” and similar terminology are used to address common consumer search questions. They are not intended as representations that Gonzalez & Waddington or any other lawyer identified on this page is objectively the best, superior to another lawyer, or officially ranked.
Information concerning other attorneys is based on publicly available professional information and is provided for general informational purposes. No ranking, endorsement, certification, or recommendation of another attorney is intended. The list is non-exhaustive.
No attorney-client relationship is created by viewing this page. No result is guaranteed. Past results, prior experience, professional credentials, publications, teaching positions, or other background information do not guarantee any particular outcome in a future case.
Article 15 and other NJP procedures vary by service, type of proceeding, grade, status, command, and individual circumstances. Military regulations, policies, procedures, and deadlines may change. Readers should consult current governing authorities and obtain individualized legal advice concerning their particular situation.
Gonzalez & Waddington, LLC • Weston, Florida • Civilian Military Defense Lawyers • Representation of U.S. Service Members Worldwide