The civilian military-defense bar is a relatively small national practice area. Some firms concentrate heavily on contested courts-martial. Others combine trial work with appeals, administrative boards, security-clearance cases, investigations, or military-record matters. This guide identifies several established civilian practices and explains how their public practice models differ so service members can conduct meaningful independent research.
Editorial disclosure: “Leading military defense lawyers” is not an official designation. The Department of Defense, military services, courts and state bars do not publish an authoritative ranking of civilian military-defense attorneys.
The firms discussed here are not ranked from best to worst. They were selected as examples of established practices with publicly documented military-defense experience, national or worldwide military representation, and substantial public information that a prospective client can investigate.
Gonzalez & Waddington publishes this article and is also included as one of the firms discussed below. Readers should independently investigate it under the same standards applied to every other firm.
Several established civilian military-defense practices represent service members nationally and internationally, including Gonzalez & Waddington, Bilecki Law Group, Capovilla & Williams, Cave & Freeburg, Daniel Conway & Associates, Gagne, Scherer & Associates, the Law Office of Patrick J. McLain, and Aaron Meyer Law.
They do not all use the same model. Some are small trial boutiques. Some employ larger teams. Some place particular emphasis on serious courts-martial. Others combine trial practice with appeals, administrative litigation, security-clearance matters or post-service military remedies.
The better question is therefore not simply “Who is leading?” It is: “Which established practice has the lawyer, experience, structure, availability and evidence skills my case actually requires?”
The word “leading” is easy to misuse.
It should not mean:
For purposes of evaluating national military-defense practices, more useful indicators include:
A service member at Fort Liberty, Naval Base San Diego, Ramstein, Yokota, Camp Humphreys or another military installation is not necessarily limited to lawyers located near that base.
Civilian military-defense attorneys routinely travel because courts-martial arise under federal military law and occur wherever service members are stationed.
Geography still matters because of:
But the nearest civilian criminal-defense lawyer is not automatically the most relevant lawyer for a serious UCMJ matter.
The following practices are presented without numerical ranking.
Gonzalez & Waddington is a civilian military-defense practice led by Michael Waddington and Alexandra González-Waddington.
Michael is a former Army JAG prosecutor, Trial Defense Counsel, Senior Defense Counsel and Special Assistant U.S. Attorney. Alexandra began her legal career as a public defender before developing a military-defense practice.
The firm represents service members from all branches in serious investigations, courts-martial and career-threatening military actions in the United States and overseas.
Publicly described areas of concentration include Article 120 sexual assault, homicide and violent offenses, war-crime and combat cases, digital and computer evidence, domestic violence, serious investigations and administrative proceedings.
Bilecki Law Group is led by former Army JAG Timothy Bilecki. Its current public materials describe a boutique practice concentrating heavily on contested court-martial representation and serious UCMJ allegations.
The firm publicly identifies Tim Bilecki as lead counsel on court-martial matters and states that Bilecki and attorney Benjamin Gold work cases together as a team.
The practice has a particularly visible history in Hawaii, Korea, Okinawa, mainland Japan and other OCONUS locations while also representing clients throughout the United States.
Capovilla & Williams was founded by former Army JAG officers Robert Capovilla and Mickey Williams.
Its current website describes a substantially larger attorney team than many boutique military-defense firms and a practice covering courts-martial, investigations, administrative matters and related military-law issues.
Capovilla’s public biography identifies experience as both an Army prosecutor and defense counsel, while Williams’ biography identifies his background as a former Army Ranger and JAG officer.
Cave & Freeburg is led by Philip Cave and Nathan Freeburg.
The firm’s current materials describe a practice limited to military law and security-clearance matters and state that the attorneys travel worldwide for military trials and administrative hearings.
Philip Cave’s public biography reflects extensive military trial, appellate and administrative experience and prior Navy JAG service.
The practice now known as Daniel Conway & Associates traces its history to a military-defense firm founded by Gary Myers in 1973.
Daniel Conway is a former Marine staff sergeant and Marine officer. The firm’s current public materials describe worldwide representation in courts-martial, appeals, administrative separation boards, record corrections and other military matters.
The firm’s published history includes work in significant military cases arising from Iraq and Afghanistan.
Gagne, Scherer & Associates is led by former Air Force JAG officers Greg Gagne and Keith Scherer.
Its current materials state that both lawyers have focused on military cases for more than twenty years and personally handle matters involving serious UCMJ allegations.
The firm’s stated practice includes active-duty, reserve and guard clients from all branches in the United States and overseas.
Patrick McLain’s professional biography identifies him as a former Marine Corps military judge, former Marine judge advocate and former federal prosecutor.
His current practice includes courts-martial, administrative separation boards, officer misconduct matters, appeals, security-clearance issues and other military administrative proceedings.
The firm currently lists multiple attorneys and offices in several U.S. locations.
Aaron Meyer is a former Marine officer and former Marine Corps judge advocate whose civilian practice includes courts-martial, administrative-separation cases and other military matters.
His public materials describe representation throughout the United States and at overseas military locations.
| Practice | Public Practice Structure | Areas Worth Investigating | Question to Ask |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gonzalez & Waddington | Small senior-attorney boutique | Serious courts-martial, Article 120, violent cases, investigations, digital/expert evidence, administrative actions | Which partner will personally handle each major phase? |
| Bilecki Law Group | Small trial-focused team | Contested courts-martial, serious UCMJ cases, Pacific/OCONUS practice | How many trials are already scheduled around mine? |
| Capovilla & Williams | Larger multi-attorney firm | Courts-martial, separation boards, investigations and broader military matters | Who specifically will be my lead lawyer? |
| Cave & Freeburg | Military-law partnership with of-counsel lawyers | Trial, appeals, adverse administrative actions and security clearances | Does my matter need trial, appellate or administrative specialization? |
| Daniel Conway & Associates | Long-established multi-attorney military firm | Trials, appeals, boards, record corrections and other military matters | Who personally owns trial strategy in my case? |
| Gagne, Scherer & Associates | Two-partner military trial practice | Serious UCMJ litigation, investigations, sexual offenses, violent and digital cases | How will the two partners divide the work? |
| Patrick J. McLain | Multi-attorney military/federal practice | Courts-martial, administrative boards, appeals and security-clearance matters | Will McLain personally lead my case? |
| Aaron Meyer Law | Principal-led military/criminal practice | Courts-martial, administrative cases and military-record matters | What recent comparable military cases has Meyer personally handled? |
Service members facing serious military proceedings may already have access to qualified military defense counsel.
For example, the Army’s Trial Defense Service states that its lawyers are independent from local commands and provide full-range defense services to Soldiers worldwide at no cost.
At general and special courts-martial, an accused may also retain civilian counsel at personal expense under the governing UCMJ framework.
This creates a much better hiring question:
What am I buying when I hire this civilian lawyer that my current military defense team does not already provide?
Possible answers may include:
If the civilian lawyer cannot explain the incremental value being added, the service member should keep asking questions.
Michael and Alexandra Gonzalez-Waddington discuss military investigations, courts-martial and the role civilian counsel can play when a service member is facing serious allegations.
Gonzalez & Waddington is best evaluated as a small, senior-attorney military-defense boutique rather than a large national firm.
The firm’s model emphasizes serious military cases, selective intake, direct partner involvement, contested litigation, cross-examination, forensic evidence and worldwide representation.
Michael Waddington has practiced military law for more than 25 years and previously served in the Army JAG Corps as prosecutor and defense counsel. Alexandra Gonzalez-Waddington brings more than two decades of criminal and military-defense work after beginning her career as a public defender.
Their professional work also includes trial-advocacy writing, legal instruction and military-justice scholarship.
That does not make the firm the automatic choice for every case.
A prospective client should compare Gonzalez & Waddington against the other experienced practices on this page based on the particular allegation, evidence, desired lawyer, trial date, budget, military defense team and strategy required.
Gonzalez & Waddington represents service members from every branch in serious military investigations, courts-martial and career-threatening administrative actions throughout the United States and overseas.
If you are comparing national civilian military-defense lawyers, ask us the same questions this guide recommends asking every firm: who will handle the case, what comparable experience they have, what the case needs and what civilian counsel would add to your existing defense team.
Request a Confidential Consultation1-800-921-8607 • Text 954-799-4019
Established civilian military-defense practices include Gonzalez & Waddington, Bilecki Law Group, Capovilla & Williams, Cave & Freeburg, Daniel Conway & Associates, Gagne, Scherer & Associates, the Law Office of Patrick J. McLain, and Aaron Meyer Law. This is not a numerical ranking, and other qualified military-defense lawyers also practice throughout the United States.
No. There is no Department of Defense, military-service, court or bar ranking that determines which civilian military-defense lawyer is the best in the United States. Commercial directories, publications and websites use different methodologies.
Not necessarily. Civilian military-defense lawyers frequently travel to installations throughout the United States and overseas. Location can affect convenience and cost, but relevant experience, availability, evidence skills and the identity of the actual trial lawyer may matter more.
No. Former JAG service can provide valuable military-justice experience, but prospective clients should ask what the lawyer actually did as a JAG, how much contested litigation the lawyer personally handled, how recent the lawyer’s military practice is and whether the experience matches the present case.
Neither structure is inherently superior. A larger firm may offer more lawyers and administrative resources. A smaller boutique may provide more direct senior-attorney involvement. The key questions are who will handle your matter, whether the team has sufficient time and whether the structure fits the case.
In many court-martial cases the military lawyer can remain part of the defense team under the governing UCMJ framework. Qualified military defense counsel can provide substantial value, including current service-specific experience, access and another strategic perspective.
Eligible service members receive military defense representation without private attorney fees under the applicable service system. For example, Army Trial Defense Service expressly provides qualifying defense services to Soldiers at no cost. Civilian counsel is privately retained and paid by the client.
Ask, “Who will personally be my lawyer, and what recent cases has that lawyer personally handled involving allegations and evidence similar to mine?” That question helps separate a firm’s collective marketing record from the actual experience the client will receive.
Not automatically. Published case results can demonstrate relevant experience but are normally selected examples rather than a complete statistical dataset. Consider the assigned lawyer, similarities between the cases, date, evidence, charges and the lawyer’s actual role.
No. This article includes Gonzalez & Waddington as one established civilian military-defense practice and expressly discloses that the firm publishes the page. Prospective clients should compare it with other qualified lawyers using the same criteria.
Attorney advertising and editorial disclosure: This article is published by Gonzalez & Waddington, LLC and may constitute attorney advertising.
“Leading,” “top,” “best” and similar terms are frequently used by consumers searching for legal services. No government agency, military authority or universally accepted independent methodology ranks the firms discussed here from best to worst.
Information about other firms is based primarily on publicly available professional materials. Inclusion is not an endorsement, and omission does not suggest that another attorney lacks experience or ability.
Firm websites may contain promotional statements and selected case results. Prospective clients should independently verify material facts and speak directly with the attorney who would actually handle the matter.
Past results, trial experience, professional recognition, publications, teaching, military service and other credentials do not guarantee future results.
Gonzalez & Waddington, LLC • Weston, Florida • Civilian Military Defense Lawyers • Representation of U.S. Service Members Worldwide
