In the United States Military there are some situations which a soldier is able to request legal counsel, and in others he cannot.
Non-Punitive punishment, or Commander based Non-Judicial punishment under UCMJ does not require the presence of a legal representative. These proceedings are considered to be Command directed for minor offenses such as Laziness, disrespect, not being on time for formation etc. (Administrative). Non-Punitive hearings are allowed because the soldier has the right to refuse non-judicial punishment, and have a hearing or trial under Court Martial. Non-judicial punishments are usually not kept on a service members military record. “Article 15, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 815, grants authority to commanders to impose “disciplinary punishments for minor offenses without the intervention of a court-martial.” (Shanor, p76)
While the Soldier cannot have legal representation during article 15 proceedings, he is allowed many rights, such as:
1. Right to remain silent.
2. The right to consult with Counsel, and have the time and location of services given to soldier.
3. The right to refuse an Article 15 and demand trial by court-martial.
4. The right to represent oneself in front of the Commander.
5. The right to call witnesses
6. The right to present evidence.
7. The right to a spoke person to help explain the accused case, which can be, but does not need to be a civilian law representative.
8. The right to an open hearing, or request a closed hearing.
9. The right to see evidence being presented against serviceman in question.
10. The right to appeal. (Shanor, p83-84)
Special Court-Martial also do not require legal counsel to be performed. The reasoning is the same, that is, the soldier can demand a General or Special Court-martial which must guarantee counsel before their proceedings. (Shanor p89)
When a General or Special Court-martial is convened, the soldier must be allowed to have counsel. The only major differences between the two are that under a General Court-martial: “(1) appointed trial lawyers are always certified military lawyers and (2) military judges are always detailed. RCM 1103(b)(2)(B). “ (Shanor p116)
Sources:
Shanor, C. A. Military L:Aw in a Nutshell. Retrieved November 25, 2016, from VitalSource, https://online.vitalsource.com/#/books/9781628106718/cfi/6/2!/4/2/2@0:27.8
Non-Punitive punishment, or Commander based Non-Judicial punishment under UCMJ does not require the presence of a legal representative. These proceedings are considered to be Command directed for minor offenses such as Laziness, disrespect, not being on time for formation etc. (Administrative). Non-Punitive hearings are allowed because the soldier has the right to refuse non-judicial punishment, and have a hearing or trial under Court Martial. Non-judicial punishments are usually not kept on a service members military record. “Article 15, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 815, grants authority to commanders to impose “disciplinary punishments for minor offenses without the intervention of a court-martial.” (Shanor, p76)
While the Soldier cannot have legal representation during article 15 proceedings, he is allowed many rights, such as:
1. Right to remain silent.
2. The right to consult with Counsel, and have the time and location of services given to soldier.
3. The right to refuse an Article 15 and demand trial by court-martial.
4. The right to represent oneself in front of the Commander.
5. The right to call witnesses
6. The right to present evidence.
7. The right to a spoke person to help explain the accused case, which can be, but does not need to be a civilian law representative.
8. The right to an open hearing, or request a closed hearing.
9. The right to see evidence being presented against serviceman in question.
10. The right to appeal. (Shanor, p83-84)
Special Court-Martial also do not require legal counsel to be performed. The reasoning is the same, that is, the soldier can demand a General or Special Court-martial which must guarantee counsel before their proceedings. (Shanor p89)
When a General or Special Court-martial is convened, the soldier must be allowed to have counsel. The only major differences between the two are that under a General Court-martial: “(1) appointed trial lawyers are always certified military lawyers and (2) military judges are always detailed. RCM 1103(b)(2)(B). “ (Shanor p116)
Sources:
Shanor, C. A. Military L:Aw in a Nutshell. Retrieved November 25, 2016, from VitalSource, https://online.vitalsource.com/#/books/9781628106718/cfi/6/2!/4/2/2@0:27.8