Table Contents
Article 128b of the Uniform Code of Military Justice defines and criminalizes acts of domestic violence within the military justice system, focusing on assaultive or harmful conduct directed at a spouse, intimate partner, or similarly situated household member. The article establishes that qualifying misconduct is treated as a distinct offense beyond general assault, reflecting the military’s specific interest in addressing violence within personal or domestic relationships.
The article applies when the alleged victim has a defined relationship to the accused, such as a current or former spouse, intimate partner, co-parent, or individual who shares or recently shared a household. Because the statute hinges on relationship status, allegations often revolve around proving the nature and extent of the connection between the individuals involved in addition to the underlying conduct.
Article 128b can trigger felony-level exposure through potential court-martial charges, as the statute authorizes significant punitive measures, including confinement and punitive separation. Independent of criminal proceedings, substantiated allegations may also lead to administrative actions such as adverse records, loss of career opportunities, or involuntary separation based on command-level determinations.
Unlike civilian domestic violence laws, which vary by state and often rely on local statutory definitions and sentencing schemes, Article 128b creates a unified military standard that applies worldwide regardless of local jurisdiction. Its elements, enforcement mechanisms, and potential administrative consequences reflect the unique structure of military discipline and differ from civilian frameworks in both scope and procedural context.
Domestic violence and abuse under military law, defined in Article 128b UCMJ, involve assaultive or coercive acts against a spouse or intimate partner. At Fort Bliss, such allegations can rapidly escalate into administrative separation or court-martial actions. Gonzalez & Waddington provide guidance; call 1-800-921-8607.
Watch the criminal defense lawyers at Gonzalez & Waddington break down how they defend criminal cases and service members worldwide against Federal Charges, Florida State Charges, UCMJ allegations, CID/NCIS/OSI investigations, court-martials, Article 120 cases, administrative separations, and GOMORs. If you’re under investigation or facing charges, this video explains what your rights are and how experienced criminal defense lawyers can make the difference.
When concerns of domestic violence or abuse are raised at Fort Bliss, they move quickly due to mandatory reporting requirements within the military system. Command teams, law enforcement, medical personnel, and Family Advocacy Program professionals are obligated to report certain information, which ensures that allegations receive immediate attention and are documented for safety and administrative purposes.
Initial reports often lead to prompt protective measures, including no-contact orders and restrictions involving privately owned firearms. These steps are designed to stabilize the situation, limit further conflict, and comply with Department of Defense and Army policy, even while facts are still being reviewed.
Commands also apply risk management procedures that prioritize the safety of everyone involved. This includes rapidly assessing potential hazards, reviewing living arrangements, and monitoring unit readiness impacts. Because command actions are closely tracked and must be reported up the chain, these situations naturally gain visibility and progress quickly through official channels.
If you or a loved one is facing criminal charges or a criminal investigation by federal authorities, the military, or the State of Florida, early defense matters. Gonzalez & Waddington provide disciplined, trial-focused criminal defense for high-stakes cases involving serious allegations and complex evidence. To speak with experienced criminal defense lawyers and get confidential guidance, call 1-800-921-8607 or text 954-909-7407 to request a no-cost, confidential consultation.
Cases often involve relationship disputes or household conflict in which partners, spouses, or family members describe disagreements that escalate into concerns about safety. These situations may include differing accounts of what occurred, and service members or dependents may report that routine arguments were interpreted by others as potential misconduct.
Another frequent pattern involves third-party reporting, where neighbors, friends, or command personnel request welfare checks after hearing raised voices or observing signs of distress. These reports can trigger law enforcement or military response even when those involved did not seek outside intervention themselves.
Alcohol use and emotional escalation are also commonly referenced in statements made during stressful incidents. Individuals may later clarify that comments made in the heat of the moment did not reflect their intentions, and authorities often must evaluate how stress, fatigue, and intoxication may have influenced perceptions and descriptions of the event.
Domestic violence investigations at Fort Bliss involve coordinated efforts between military and civilian authorities to collect information, document events, and establish a clear record of what occurred. Investigators focus on gathering factual materials that help clarify the circumstances surrounding an incident.
These inquiries rely on multiple forms of evidence, each of which contributes to developing an objective account. The materials collected may originate from official personnel, medical professionals, or digital sources, depending on the nature of the allegation.
Service members at Fort Bliss can face administrative separation based solely on domestic violence allegations, even without a criminal conviction. Commanders may initiate separation actions when they believe the allegations raise concerns about fitness for continued service or good order and discipline, making the process markedly different from criminal proceedings.
These actions often proceed through a Board of Inquiry or show‑cause proceedings, where evidence is reviewed to determine whether separation is supported and whether the member can remain in the Army. The process allows the service member to present rebuttal materials, witness statements, and other documentation in response to the allegations.
If separation is recommended, the resulting discharge characterization—honorable, general under honorable conditions, or other than honorable—can hinge on the circumstances of the case and the member’s overall record. Each characterization carries distinct administrative and post‑service consequences.
Domestic‑violence‑related separation actions can also affect a service member’s career exposure, including the ability to retain or renew a security clearance, eligibility for certain assignments, and long‑term professional prospects within the Army. Even unresolved allegations can create barriers that influence future opportunities and advancement.
Domestic violence incidents within the military frequently trigger both criminal military investigations and command-directed investigations, as these parallel processes help determine whether misconduct occurred, identify any threats to good order and discipline, and assess potential violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
Findings from these investigations can influence administrative measures such as Letters of Reprimand, which commanders may issue when the evidence supports misconduct but does not necessarily rise to the level of criminal charges or when administrative accountability is deemed appropriate.
More serious or substantiated allegations can lead to Boards of Inquiry or court-martial proceedings, where the results of earlier investigative steps play a significant role in determining whether a service member faces administrative separation, retention decisions, or formal criminal prosecution.
Our team brings extensive experience handling relationship‑driven allegations, including the complex interpersonal dynamics and evidence challenges that often arise in domestic violence and abuse cases connected to Fort Bliss. This background allows the firm to address statements, digital communications, and contextual factors that frequently shape these investigations.
Gonzalez & Waddington integrate criminal defense with administrative and military‑specific considerations, ensuring that actions affecting a service member’s career, clearance, and standing are analyzed alongside the criminal aspects of the case. This unified approach helps clients navigate both command‑level responses and the broader legal process.
With decades of military justice experience, the firm is well‑versed in the cross‑examination of witnesses, command representatives, and investigators, helping to clarify contested facts and test the reliability of statements. Their background in courts‑martial and related proceedings supports a thorough, methodical defense strategy tailored to the military environment at Fort Bliss.
Article 128b addresses offenses involving domestic violence within the military justice system. It defines acts of domestic abuse and outlines circumstances under which certain conduct becomes a criminal offense. The article also establishes penalties based on the nature and severity of the alleged conduct.
A domestic violence allegation can trigger administrative separation proceedings independently of any court-martial. Commanders may initiate administrative actions based on their assessment of the situation. These actions operate under different standards than criminal processes.
No-contact orders are command directives intended to prevent communication or physical contact between involved parties. They are issued to maintain safety and preserve good order and discipline. Violating such an order can result in additional administrative or disciplinary action.
Certain domestic violence allegations or qualifying orders can trigger restrictions on possessing or handling firearms. These limitations may stem from federal law or command policy. They can affect a service member’s duty assignments and access to weapons.
Evidence may include statements, digital communications, medical records, and observations from law enforcement or command personnel. Physical evidence or documented injuries may also be reviewed. Each piece is evaluated to understand the context of the alleged incident.
Allegations can influence administrative measures such as counseling, reprimands, or separation proceedings. These actions occur within command authority and can proceed regardless of criminal case outcomes. They focus on readiness, conduct, and suitability for continued service.
A civilian lawyer may participate in advising or representing a service member in certain proceedings. Their involvement can include administrative matters or interactions with civilian authorities. Coordination with military defense counsel is common when both are engaged.
Fort Bliss sits in far western Texas, extending into southern New Mexico, and is closely tied to the borderland communities of El Paso, Texas, and Las Cruces, New Mexico. Its location in the Chihuahuan Desert provides expansive training ranges with wide-open terrain and consistent weather, enabling year-round operations. The surrounding region blends urban centers with rugged desert landscapes, creating an environment where the installation and local communities maintain a long-standing, interdependent relationship. Fort Bliss plays a central role in the economic and social fabric of El Paso, with military families integrating into local schools, businesses, and public services.
The installation is a major U.S. Army hub, known for housing key combat and air defense units that support national and global missions. Fort Bliss hosts elements responsible for high-level readiness, force modernization, and integrated air and missile defense capabilities. Its vast training areas support large-scale exercises that prepare units for rapid deployment and complex, multi-domain operations. As one of the Army’s largest posts, the base contributes significantly to the Army’s ability to project power across multiple theaters.
Fort Bliss supports a substantial active-duty population, along with a steady flow of rotational forces conducting training, mobilization, and demobilization. The installation’s mission set includes armored maneuver units, aviation assets, air and missile defense formations, and extensive logistical and sustainment capabilities. Medical facilities, intelligence activities, and command headquarters further contribute to a dynamic operational environment. Because many units deploy overseas from Fort Bliss or train for high-readiness missions, the tempo on post remains consistently high, with frequent field exercises and joint-service activities shaping daily life for service members and their families.
The operational demands at Fort Bliss also intersect with the realities of military law. Service members stationed at or transiting through the installation may face investigations, administrative actions, non-judicial punishment, courts-martial, or separation proceedings under the UCMJ. The scale of training, deployment cycles, and the fast-paced environment can influence how legal issues emerge and how they are processed. The military defense lawyers at Gonzalez & Waddington represent servicemembers at Fort Bliss, providing experienced counsel for those navigating complex military justice matters.
Article 128 addresses general assault, while Article 128b applies when the alleged assault occurs within a domestic or intimate relationship defined by the statute.
A protected victim includes a current or former spouse, intimate partner, cohabitant, person with whom the accused shares a child, or someone in a qualifying dating relationship.
Article 128b is the UCMJ offense that criminalizes domestic violence involving an intimate partner or family member and incorporates specific relationship and conduct elements beyond simple assault.
Yes, Article 128b cases often proceed without physical evidence and rely on statements, recordings, or circumstantial proof.
A not guilty verdict does not automatically prevent administrative action or career-impacting consequences.
