Gagne, Scherer & Associates, LLC

08/10/2026

Hurlburt Field is AFSOC headquarters and one of the most operationally significant bases in the Air Force. The 1st Special Operations Wing and its supporting units train and deploy forces for precision strike, global access, and personnel recovery.

Serious cases at Hurlburt are handled by OSTC District 1 out of Joint Base Langley-Eustis. S*xual assault, domestic violence, indecent recording, and child po*******hy, and other OSTC-driven cases make up the bulk of the recent general court-martial docket. Base-office cases like Article 112a failed urinalysis and the allegations deferred by OSTC occur at Hurlburt like every other base but don’t always end up in court.

We have defended Airmen at Hurlburt for more than twenty years, including a full acquittal on double-victim s*xual assault charges that arose during a divorce and custody fight; charges dismissed with prejudice after an Article 10 speedy-trial motion; and an entire case thrown out after a posse comitatus challenge to a joint civilian-OSI search.

The page below explains the current military justice scene at Hurlburt, how OSTC oversees cases there from afar, what the recent docket actually looks like, and provides a handful of examples of the kinds of cases we have handled at the base.
If you’re under investigation or facing charges at Hurlburt, the earlier you bring in experienced counsel, the better.

Read here: https://ucmjlawyers.com/air-force-bases/hurlburt-lawyer/

Civilian military defense lawyer for Hurlburt Field. Experienced with AFSOC cases, Article 15s, courts-martial, and Article 32 hearings.

07/22/2026

Elmendorf is the Air Force side of Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, nominally a joint base but functionally two entirely separate entities.

The UCMJ is the same at JBER as everywhere else, but the area presents some rare challenges. Weather and distance can complicate travel for judges, attorneys, and witnesses, and winter storms can lead to base closures that set courts-martial back.

If you’re facing investigation or court-martial for an allegation of committing a “covered offense,” like CSAM, domestic violence, child endangerment, or s*xual assault, bringing in a strong civilian military attorney is paramount. Those cases are overseen and prosecuted by the Office of the Special Trial Counsel, a corps of elite prosecutors whose mandate is to increase conviction rates in these cases.

OSTC District 6 is based at Kadena and keeps one attorney on the ground at JBER. They will send other OSTC attorneys there as necessary. The cases OSTC keeps tend to have corroboration; for example, pure he-said/she-said 120s usually get pushed back to the base legal office. Domestic violence, CSAM, and various s*x cases make up a large share of the docket at any given time.

The page below is an overview of the current military justice culture at Elmendorf, how OSTC staffs its cases there, what the unique geographical challenges are for courts-martial in the region, and the local details that can have consequences when you’re defending a case in Anchorage, including the Dena’ina homeland and the practical realities of lodging and travel during a summer court-martial.

If you’re under investigation or facing charges at Elmendorf or anywhere else in Alaska, the earlier you get experienced counsel involved, the better off you’ll be. Gagne, Scherer & Associates has been successfully defending military members in Alaska for over twenty years and never charges extra for cases there, no matter how much travel time or case delays are involved.

Read here: https://ucmjlawyers.com/air-force-bases/elmendorf-lawyer/

Experienced civilian defense lawyers for Elmendorf AFB. Handling Arctic mission UCMJ cases, Article 15, Article 32, and courts-martial.

07/17/2026

Gen-X had its latchkey kids, and many Gen Z and Gen Alpha kids have been similarly unsupervised, even when their parents were in the same room. Right under the noses of parents and teachers, s*xtortion entered the zeitgeist throughout the middle schools and high schools across the USA. And now s*xtortion cases are becoming more common across the military branches, especially in tech school environments.

A guy gets a girl to send him a “pic,” then threatens to distribute it to parents, friends, or the commander unless he gets more pics or something else he wants. AI deepfake apps have made the threat easier and faster to carry out.

What makes s*xtortion distinct from extortion is the s*x part, obviously. But it’s also what makes it a registerable s*x offense. One incident can lead to “stacked” charges under Article 127 plus 117a, 120b, 120c, or 134. All of those are registerable s*x offenses. Prosecutors stack charges because a longer charge sheet pressures the accused toward a plea and gives the judge more room to impose heavy punishment.

Service members under investigation for s*xtortion often make things worse for themselves by confessing to agents, deleting messages or images, reaching out to apologize or ask the person to drop the case, or talking to roommates and family. This can lead to allegations of witness tampering and obstruction of justice. And since there is no parent-child communication privilege, or friend-defendant privilege, anyone he tells his story to can be turned into a witness against him at trial.

Gagne, Scherer & Associates has defended these cases for over twenty years. The page below explains how OSTC charges s*xtortion cases, why they stack charges, the common mistakes that make the situation worse, and what s*xtortion really looks like in the real world.

Read here: https://ucmjlawyers.com/how-military-prosecutes-s*xtortion/

How the U.S. military prosecutes s*xtortion under the UCMJ, including Article 127 charges, AI deepfakes, stacked charges, and mistakes.

07/15/2026

One of the constants of military justice is that a large number of cases will arise from a man and woman drinking alcohol together, hooking up, and then things getting awkward the next day or not long after that. No matter which branch of service, no matter how often the law changes, the scenario looks the same.

Typically, the female later claims to have trouble piecing together the events of the night. Sometimes this starts the morning after, sometimes not until years later. In time, she claims (having now discussed her story with allies) she wasn’t capable of consenting to s*x. She might begin the case by telling a friend her story, or a mandatory reporter, and eventually the case will work its way to investigators and OSTC. The military, whether through the base JAG office or OSTC, then steps in and charges the guy under Article 120(b)(3)(A). That section of the UCMJ makes it a crime to have s*x with someone who couldn’t consent because of intoxication, when the accused knew or reasonably should have known she was incapable of consenting. OSTC rarely keeps a “he said, she said” case, preferring to dump those on the base office JAGs, but will go forward if there is strong corroboration for what “she said.”

It’s an allegation that can be hard to prove at a court-martial, once the accused has been given a real chance to clear his name. Unlike advocates and politicians, the UCMJ doesn’t simply “believe all victims.” A military member accused of s*xual assault has a more robust opportunity to defend himself than you’re likely to see in any other legal system. One of the most common and promising defenses to a charge like this is called “mistake of fact as to consent.” The accused must have held an honest belief at the time of the s*xual interaction that the alleged victim consented and was capable of consenting. The belief also has to be reasonable from a sober person’s viewpoint; the accused’s own intoxication is irrelevant. Prior s*xual history can support this defense in some situations.

Expert testimony is also crucial to a powerful defense. These allegations often amount to snapshots, known as fragments, of memory. Even when the complainant believes every word she’s saying, these memories might be entirely false. By their nature, they’re going to be incomplete. Alcohol interferes with the ability to recall memories, and to lay them down in the first place. Memory gets reconstructed every time the story gets told to friends, SARC, a nurse, or a therapist. By the time the case gets to trial, the defense is often able to establish severe problems with the reliability of the complainant’s recall.

The page below explains how the military charges drunk s*x cases under Article 120, what the mistake of fact is, and how alcohol science and memory science can create reasonable doubt in these prosecutions.

Read here: https://ucmjlawyers.com/alcohol-article-120-drunk-s*x-cases/

Article 120 drunk s*x cases: How the military charges them and the key defenses that can lead to acquittals, including blackouts vs passouts.

07/08/2026

The vast majority of failed urinalysis cases in the military these days end with an administrative separation and a General Under Honorable Conditions discharge, imposed against a member who has no effective way to challenge that decision. In those cases, it’s usually foolish to spend a lot of money on a civilian lawyer whose expertise is wasted.

Occasionally, a failed urinalysis will be handled at a separation board. That’s a chance to fight back. And the Air Force, unique among the services, will still court-martial someone for a single failed urinalysis (except for THC). Whether it makes sense to spend money on counsel depends on a short list of practical considerations, beginning with whether you have a real opportunity to defend yourself.

The Department of Defense sets cutoff levels that determine whether a result gets reported as positive. The cutoff level is especially important in co***ne cases prosecuted by the Air Force, as the closer your result is to that cutoff, the stronger your defense can be. In a low nanogram co***ne case, the science is very favorable to the defense, in addition to whatever challenges can be made to the collection and testing processes. But even a low nanogram level in a THC case is very hard to beat because the science does not support passive or unknowing ingestion the way it can with co***ne.

Members with more than six years of service can normally demand a separation board (eight years for Coast Guard members). At a board, you can present evidence and cross-examine witnesses, but there is no military judge, and the burden of proof is only preponderance of the evidence. The threat level is lower, but so is the degree of due process. Despite the lower threat level, attorneys need to treat a board as seriously as a court-martial. At a board, there’s no risk of jail or criminal conviction, but a loss can result not only in a separation, but also in a service characterization of Under Other Than Honorable too, which would mean loss of career, benefits, and a significant threat to employability.

If you’re facing a board or court-martial, it makes sense to hire an experienced civilian military attorney. The expertise will make a difference. But if you're junior enlisted or a probationary officer and facing only a General or Honorable discharge through the notification process, free advice from the JAG defense counsel is usually sufficient.

Gagne, Scherer & Associates has handled urinalysis cases for the entirety of its decades in military justice at installations across the country and overseas. The page linked below explains the factors that determine whether you should hire experienced civilian counsel for a positive urinalysis or stick with free military defense counsel. It also covers when these cases stay at the administrative level, when they might go to court, what your defenses might be, and how to decide if fighting the urinalysis result is worth the cost of hiring an attorney.

Read here: https://ucmjlawyers.com/civilian-military-lawyer-urinalysis-case/

JAG Experience, Worldwide Service from the attorneys at Gagne, Scherer & Associates, LLC. Our former JAG attorneys are here to help you now.

07/03/2026

Navy OSTC almost always takes child s*x offenses, including CSAM cases, to trial. It defers most alcohol-related Article 120 allegations and standard he-said/she-said s*xual assault cases back to the command. Domestic violence allegations made by an ex are frequently deferred, but OSTC will keep DV cases supported by DNA, medical evidence, strangulation, photos, or confessions. When it comes to the most serious cases, known as covered offenses, OSTC has exclusive discretion whether to “go forward” or dump a case off to command for a lower disposition. It often comes down not just to the nature of the allegation but also the quality and volume of corroborating evidence.

The highest volume of Navy courts-martial occur at the biggest bases: Norfolk and San Diego. But Mayport, Jacksonville, Bremerton, Pearl Harbor, and Great Lakes get action too. UCMJ cases of all kinds can arise at any installation, no matter how small or remote, and the need for experienced, high-quality defense counsel applies everywhere too.

Unfortunately, Sailors under investigation don't get free JAG defense counsel from the Defense Services Office until court-martial charges are preferred. Military investigations typically take months, sometimes more than a year. That means a Sailor will be on his own as NCIS and OSTC build the case, unless the Sailor hires a proactive court-martial defense attorney. And when DSO counsel eventually gets assigned, the lawyer might be a first-tour LT or LTJG. Hiring an experienced attorney with substantial court-martial experience is always the right move if funds allow for it.

When OSTC takes a case forward, there will be a preliminary hearing known as the Article 32. It’s often the best chance the defense has to derail a case by creating reasonable doubt about the case’s viability for conviction if it goes to trial. Inexperienced counsel often fail to understand the value of this hearing and advise their clients to waive it, effectively guaranteeing the case will go to trial.

For over 20 years, Gagne, Scherer & Associates has defended Sailors at Navy installations worldwide.

This page explains OSTC deferral tendencies on covered offenses, which charges will go forward, where the volume of courts-martial is highest, and why the Article 32 should never be waived.

Read here: https://ucmjlawyers.com/will-your-navy-court-martial-go-to-trial/

Will your Navy court-martial go to trial? OSTC covered offense deferral rates, Article 120 cases, and why fighting your Article 32 hearing is critical.

07/02/2026

Fort Carson is home to the 4th Infantry Division and the Army’s oldest Special Forces unit. The installation covers a huge area just south of Colorado Springs. Gagne, Scherer & Associates has handled UCMJ cases there since the 2000s.

The Office of Special Trial Counsel exercises authority over “covered offenses” at Carson. These include the majority of Article 120 s*xual assault allegations, domestic violence under Article 128b, child endangerment under Article 119b, CSAM cases charged under Article 134, and other crimes related to s*x or violence.

OSTC has sole purview over those cases but typically defers those without strong corroboration back to the chain of command, where they get disposed of with NJP, GOMORs, or Special Court-Martial. OSTC will keep and prosecute cases (known as going forward) that have corroborating evidence, like DNA, medical records, incriminating messages, or confessions. Cases built mainly on conflicting statements, the classic “he said, she said,” rarely end up in a general court-martial these days.

Even if a soldier is accused of a covered offense, the Army won’t provide its soldiers with free defense counsel through the JAG before court-martial charges have been served. Unless a soldier hires civilian counsel, at his own expense, he will be alone during the investigation, which can take many months, and it’s not rare for a case with digital forensic evidence to have an investigation to take more than a year. During that time, CID and OSTC are building the case against the soldier without any obstacles. But early, proactive involvement of an experienced civilian military attorney changes that. It puts favorable information into the mix before the charging decision is made, and it’s a highly valuable HUMINT operation that can pay off not only for the charging decision but also for any proceedings that might come later.

Gagne, Scherer & Associates’ work at Fort Carson has put these principles into action. For example, one Soldier faced CSAM allegations and separation proceedings; intervention with exculpatory material led to the case being dropped before charges were served. Another soldier faced a domestic violence accusation that the command ultimately declined to prosecute when Gagne, Scherer & Associates presented contextual information. A soldier who had been in deserter status for a long time hired our firm, and we arranged his surrender and we secured his return to duty rather than a chapter with an OTH.

If you’re a soldier under investigation for a “covered offense” allegation, or already facing a court-martial, you don’t need to limit yourself to hiring an attorney who has a brick and mortar office in Colorado Springs, or anywhere in Colorado. In fact, hiring the nearest “former JAG” who takes whatever walks through the door from that one installation can be a colossal miscalculation. That attorney never sees enough serious cases to stay sharp. He handles whatever the local base sends him. That is not the volume or quality of experience required to recognize when OSTC is likely to defer a weak case.

Gagne, Scherer & Associates represents military members throughout Colorado at Fort Carson, USAFA, Schriever, Peterson, and Buckley. But as a national firm, we also take cases at installations across the country and overseas. Our constant flow of serious cases allows us to remain current with OSTC counsel and judges, as we continue to build on our 25 years of experience in military justice.

The page linked below explains OSTC deferral criteria at Carson, the kind of evidence that takes a case beyond “he said, she said,” and the opportunity for defense counsel input before OSTC decides whether to charge the case. It also covers when civilian counsel adds value on Article 120, Article 128b, and Article 134 matters at Fort Carson.

Read more: https://ucmjlawyers.com/army-bases/fort-carson-lawyer/

Fort Carson cases move fast and CID/OSTC act early. If you’re under investigation, speak with a civilian UCMJ lawyer before answering questions.

06/19/2026

About 20,000 active-duty service members are stationed in Alaska, and almost all the serious court-martial work happens at three installations: JBER in Anchorage, Fort Wainwright outside Fairbanks, and Eielson AFB next door. Gagne, Scherer & Associates has been trying cases at all three since the firm opened in 2006.

Army and Air Force OSTC prosecute the serious cases out of offices at JBER in Anchorage. A prosecutor handling a Wainwright or Eielson case is stationed 350 miles south of where the case is. He has to fly to Fairbanks to meet with CID or OSI, interview the complaining witness, and talk to other witnesses. Every step of the investigation drains significant time, and the “go-forward” or “defer” decision can take longer than the same decision at a base where OSTC is on-site or the travel isn’t so burdensome.

Defense counsel need to understand how to ethically and effectively use these burdens to gain leverage and raise the odds of getting a case deferred. OSTC is overworked everywhere and looking for reasons to defer cases that aren't easy wins. The extra travel is merely a hassle, but it can be particularly useful to the defense if OSTC already has doubts about the case, which your attorney should be seeding from day one. If OSTC sees a PHO recommendation against referral coming, they might just do the 32 by VTC and let the PHO recommendation be the top cover they need to justify dumping the case.

A few things specific to defending military cases in Alaska:

The pool of available judges is smaller than many other regions; on the Army side, judges are drawn from JBER and JBLM. It’s crucial for your attorney to have good intel on your judge and, if possible, personal experience with the judge and attorneys.

Trial days can run long because weather and increased costs of travel raise the incentive to get the case over with as little disruption as possible. Cases can spill into the weekend for the same reason. If you’re considering hiring an attorney, look closely at the contract. An attorney who tries to define a "day" as eight hours to and from his hotel door is purposely creating inevitable extra fees.

Some firms designate Alaska as a "remote location" and charge a surcharge on top of their normal fee. Other contract terms (limited trial days, eight-hour “days,” separately billed travel time) can boost the true cost of an Alaska case well past the “flat fee” quoted during the consultation. Gagne, Scherer & Associates doesn't do any of that. The Alaska flat fee is the same as the Fort Bragg flat fee. All travel time is included.

Travel costs (flight, hotel, rental car) rise and fall with the seasons. Hotel rates in Anchorage and Fairbanks during tourist season can be three times the winter rate. When the schedule allows, Gagne, Scherer & Associates tries to docket Alaska cases in winter, which is the opposite of what most attorneys do. A Wainwright trial in January will cost thousands less in travel expenses than the same trial in July.

On this page, we explain when an Alaska case justifies civilian counsel, why Wainwright and Eielson cases can take longer to resolve than JBER cases, where service members in Alaska get into trouble (the Mecca in Fairbanks, the dorms, ma*****na dispensaries on the Wainwright off-limits list), and some of our case results from JBER, Wainwright, and Eielson.

Read more: https://ucmjlawyers.com/military-bases/alaska-military-defense-lawyer/

Experienced court-martial defense for Alaska bases. Flat-fee UCMJ representation at JBER, Fort Wainwright, and Eielson with no travel or remote surcharges.

06/15/2026

Texas has nine active-duty military installations: Fort Hood in the middle of the state, Fort Bliss out west on the border, three bases nominally combined as JBSA in San Antonio, plus Sheppard, Dyess, Goodfellow, Laughlin, and NAS Corpus Christi.

Soldiers from Fort Hood lead the news on occasion, with cases including child s*xual assault, attempted murder, the murder of a romantic partner, an NCO arrested twice on child s*x assault charges, and the prosecution of the post's own s*xual assault prevention program coordinator on prostitution allegations.

Fort Bliss soldiers make the news too. Recent cases out of Bliss include an espionage prosecution for trying to send tank and combat operations details to Russia, kidnapping and r**e, murder of a fellow soldier, child exploitation involving AI-generated CSAM, and animal cruelty. The post borders Mexico, a convenient excuse for commanders to lock up soldiers who are under investigation.

Joint Base San Antonio includes three bases under one name: Lackland is the home of Air Force basic military training; Randolph has AETC headquarters and pilot instructor training; Fort Sam Houston is HQ for Army medical operations. As with most “joint bases,” the name is a branding exercise with no real effect on operations or military justice. A case at Lackland or Randolph gets handled by Air Force lawyers and law enforcement. A case at Fort Sam gets handled by Army lawyers and law enforcement.

Article 120 cases from training bases across the military, including Lackland, are rarely what the lay person would think of as s*xual assault or abusive s*xual contact. Typically, it’s juvenile locker room stuff: nut-taps, towel-snaps, dry hu***ng. Horseplay can become a registrable s*x offense if the government can prove it was done with the "intent to abuse, humiliate, harass, or degrade." The good news is that OSTC tends to defer these cases to keep them outside of the general court-martial arena. The bad news is that they can still get prosecuted by base-level JAGs and a conviction for a s*x offense under the UCMJ is registrable even if it’s at a Special Court-Martial.

The tech school bases (Sheppard and Goodfellow) can get busy with alcohol-related Article 120 cases. Classic drunken hookup behavior, often based on classic he said, she said evidence. The smaller bases (Dyess, Laughlin, Corpus Christi) see lower volume but the serious cases get prosecuted the same as at any other installation.

Gagne, Scherer & Associates has been defending military members in Texas for over 20 years, and in March 2026 KXXV-TV brought in Keith Scherer for expert insight on the Article 120 prosecution of Maj. Blaine McGraw, a Fort Hood Army OB-GYN. The case is one of the largest s*xual assault prosecutions in recent military history, with over 270 specifications involving more than 90 alleged victims.

On this page, we cover the court-martial cultures across Texas, our firm’s record of success throughout the state, our personal ties to Texas, and some unique doctrinal questions that come up at Texas bases (training base differences, Lackland Article 120s, border proximity at Bliss).

If you're at a Texas installation and you're facing a court-martial, board, or an investigation, this will help: https://ucmjlawyers.com/military-bases/texas-military-defense-lawyer/

Texas court-martial defense from a firm with 20+ years of UCMJ cases at Fort Hood, Fort Bliss, JBSA, and training bases across the state.

06/12/2026

Congress created the Office of Special Trial Counsel to drive up conviction rates in serious cases, most notably Article 120 s*xual assault. They changed the rules, removed defenses, and gave the prosecutors the power to decide which cases go to trial. The SARC/SAPR apparatus plasters lobbies across the military with anti-male messaging. Male barracks often have the same propaganda chalked into the sidewalks. OSTC is only the latest stage of the campaign. Every few years, the activists try to rig the game in new ways.

The court-martial defense attorneys of Gagne, Scherer & Associates keep winning these cases anyway. Across the Air Force, Space Force, and Army installations in Colorado Springs, we have gotten acquittals, charges dropped, and derailed cases from ever making it to trial for allegations of s*xual assault, s*xual harassment, CSAM, crimes against children, drug offenses, and other serious charges.

Our law firm of former JAGs puts two senior partners on every case, each with more than 25 years in military justice. Gagne, Scherer & Associates doesn't use chatbots or call screeners, and there's no fee for the initial consultation. Our clientele talk to Greg and Keith directly from day one.

Learn more about our work in Colorado Springs and get a few examples of how we outmaneuver the prosecution regardless of how dirty the government fights: https://ucmjlawyers.com/military-bases/colorado-springs-military-defense-lawyer/