Q. Until last weekend, I had never been arrested. I received medals for my service in Afghanistan; will my record as a good soldier matter in my case?

A. Being a good soldier still matters. But starting this year, that effect will diminish for service members facing certain charges, such as those relating to sex and financial crimes and stealing.

That's because Congress in the 2015 Defense Authorization Act approved language that makes what is known as the "good soldier defense" or "good character defense" inapplicable to several offenses under the Uniform Code of Military Justice: rape, sexual assault, stalking, larceny and wrongful appropriation, robbery, forgery, making checks with insufficient funds, sodomy, arson, extortion, burglary, housebreaking, perjury, and frauds against the United States.

Traditionally, evidence of a service member's "character or a trait of character" is not admissible if its purpose is to show the accused acted in a certain way. But under an exception to that rule, the accused is allowed to offer character evidence that could indicate he or she would not have acted in a certain way.

If the accused does present such character evidence, then the prosecution is allowed to attack the accused's character. In this year's Defense Authorization Act, Congress directed the defense secretary to amend the military rules of evidence "to provide that the general military character of an accused is not admissible for the purpose of showing the probability of innocence of the accused" for the above-listed offenses.

In U.S. v. Greg W. Vandelinder (1985), the U.S. Court of Military Appeals noted that for several decades, accused service members had been allowed to "show the probability" of their innocence by introducing "evidence" of their own good character, including evidence of their military record and standing, and of their general character as moral, law-abiding citizens. Evidence of a "specific trait of character" was admissible only if "that trait would have a reasonable tendency to show that it was unlikely" that the accused committed the particular offense charged.

While the loss of the ability to admit evidence of the accused's good character, especially in sexual assault cases, is something defense attorneys will mourn, there are cases where the good soldier defense can still be raised, most important perhaps. Most important perhaps is the ability for service members to continue to raise this defense in those involving charges of wrongful use, possession or distribution of a controlled substance.

"A person of good military character is less likely to commit offenses which strike at the heart of military discipline and readiness. Therefore, good military character is clearly a pertinent character trait in military drug cases," the court said in Vandelinder.

In U.S. v. Hector Gomez (2007), a U.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals judge in a dissenting opinion pointed to the "lack of any physical evidence and untainted witness testimony" as leaving him with "a lingering, reasonable doubt" as to whether the appellant used methamphetamines. That testimony came from, among others, character witnesses who established the appellant's "reputation for good military character and outstanding performance and dependability."

Service members should not underestimate the value of being a good soldier and having good character.

Mathew B. Tully is a veteran of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and founding partner of Tully Rinckey PLLC (www.fedattorney.com). Email questions to askthelawyer@militarytimes.com. The information in this column is not intended as legal advice.

Share:
In Other News
Load More