Ellsworth Air Force Base is the heart of America’s bomber force transition. Located just east of Rapid City, South Dakota, it is home to the 28th Bomb Wing and the B-1B Lancer. The base sits on a high plateau where the Great Plains rise toward the Black Hills, a landscape defined by long horizons, constant wind, and sudden weather changes. The region’s extremes of scorching summers, subzero winters, and prairie storms shape the pace of life as much as the mission itself. Ellsworth’s proximity to Rapid City provides basic urban access while keeping the installation firmly anchored in rural territory, surrounded by ranchland and open sky.
The 28th Bomb Wing operates under Air Force Global Strike Command (AFGSC) and maintains one of the nation’s most visible strategic assets. Its crews and maintainers handle the B-1B, a supersonic bomber capable of carrying the largest conventional payload in the Air Force inventory. The aircraft’s variable-sweep wings and long-range strike profile make it a crucial bridge between legacy systems and next-generation technology. Ellsworth is also preparing for its next chapter as the first operational home of the B-21 Raider, the Air Force’s new stealth bomber designed to replace both the B-1 and B-2 fleets. This transition represents a generational shift in technology and doctrine, making Ellsworth the focal point for the modernization of the bomber enterprise.
Daily operations at Ellsworth reach well beyond its fences. Bomber training routes extend across the upper Great Plains and into neighboring states, linking with air refueling and joint-training routes. The base also hosts periodic exercises involving other branches and allied nations.
One of us was stationed at Ellsworth. We know the joy of fighting swarms of moths in the kitchen light and wiping box elder stains off the curtains. Those swarms are a local rite of passage, and so is the sound of the B-1s shaking the windows. The B-1 is among the loudest aircraft in the world. The constant training sorties and “touch-and-go” runs take place on a flight line right behind the courtroom, so legal proceedings unfold in an environment of sustained noise. It doesn’t show up in the transcript, but a court-martial at Ellsworth often pauses as the court reporter waits for the jets to pass.
The surrounding Black Hills region carries its own mix of history and contrast. Rapid City serves as the regional hub, with tourism driven by Mount Rushmore and the Badlands less than an hour away. The economy of western South Dakota depends heavily on Ellsworth, yet the area retains the slower rhythms of small-town life. Off base, most personnel live on base, in Rapid City, Box Elder, or smaller communities spread along I-90.
Interstate 90 is also a major drug pipeline running East-West from Chicago through the Dakotas to Denver and beyond. Drug rings commonly pop up on base because of it, which means OSI and local law enforcement maintain constant surveillance over the area.
Decades of Trial Experience: Your Defense Team’s Proven Record at EAFB and Elsewhere
We are not desk-bound lawyers. We don’t do contracts, wills, and divorces. Our dedication to representing service members spans well over two decades, starting our professional careers in the JAG Corps soon after the September 11 attacks. Our practice has focused on UCMJ and court-martial defense continuously since then. We have never moved into bureaucratic desk duties or stepped away from active courtroom work.
Our firm has a unique advantage because we also bring substantial experience with the federal criminal justice system. This familiarity is a major advantage today, because military justice has recently adopted many of the exact same procedures and evidentiary rules used in federal court. That shift has been substantial. While many inside the military legal system are still adjusting to these complex changes, we have been operating within that high-stakes framework for decades.
Defense Expertise Spanning Every UCMJ Charge
Over this time, we have established our reputation by successfully defending Airmen, Soldiers, Sailors, Marines, and Coasties at every rank against the most serious UCMJ allegations. Our case experience is extensive, encompassing the full spectrum of military law:
- Sex Assault Allegations: Article 120 (Sexual Assault and related offenses), Article 120b (Sexual abuse of a child), Article 120c (Other sexual misconduct).
- Child-Related Crimes: Article 134, CSAM (Child Sexual Abuse Material), obscenity, enticement of a minor, solicitation, and Child Abuse (Article 119b).
- Felonies & Violence: Murder, attempted murder, manslaughter, assault, and domestic violence.
- Financial Crimes: Larceny and false claims, fraud related to DITY moves.
- Misconduct: Officer misconduct cases under Article 133, stolen valor, AWOL, and desertion.
- Wartime Charges: During the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, we also handled cases from a deployment location.
- Personal Conflict Allegations: We commonly handle allegations created by ex-spouses or former partners, a ripe source of false reporting.
Personal Connections to Ellsworth Air Force Base
We bring to your case not only two decades of nationwide UCMJ expertise, but also personal experience having been stationed at Ellsworth Air Force Base and doing many trials there. We know the local command culture, the typical military justice issues arising in Western South Dakota, and the specific culture of Ellsworth. That direct, long-term familiarity gives our clients an advantage that local defense counsel or inexperienced civilian attorneys might lack.
Using the UCMJ System’s Bottleneck to Your Advantage
Forget the idea that a local commander’s good faith or personal knowledge will save your case. The reality is that specialized prosecutors from the OSTC now oversee serious accusations. Their entire mission is built around maintaining a high conviction rate. This shift from personalized command justice to a specialized prosecutorial machinery presents a difficult challenge, yet it contains a point of leverage for your defense.
The days of holding critical, case-ending evidence back for a dramatic trial reveal are over. The most important dynamic concerning the OSTC is their professional mandate to avoid losses. It’s a gatekeeping responsibility.
Because they have a gatekeeping responsibility, they possess the authority to simply dismiss or downgrade a case that carries a high risk of acquittal at a General Court-Martial. Their focus on conviction statistics is their institutional strength, but this also creates an opportunity. An experienced defense attorney capitalizes on this by demonstrating, as early as possible, that the government’s case is a failure waiting to happen.
This process begins with an immediate, professional line of communication established with the assigned OSTC counsel. The true goal of these “offline” exchanges is to educate the prosecutor, clearly laying out the true facts and risks that the initial report may have minimized or simply failed to investigate. It is the first formal opportunity to highlight facts that exonerate you, introduce profound witness credibility problems, and model precisely how the known weaknesses in their evidence translate into a failure to meet the high burden of proof at trial. This dialogue only works if your counsel has a track record of being a straight shooter; a prosecutor will only engage seriously if they trust the defense attorney’s credibility.
This early, informal preparation dictates the success of the formal proceeding: the Article 32 Preliminary Hearing. This hearing is the stage where the weaknesses previously discussed off-line are documented on the record. Many inexperienced counsel may dismiss the hearing as a pointless exercise, but we view it as the best mechanism to expose every flaw pertaining to the government’s case before a neutral, independent hearing officer. This process creates an official, detailed record of the case’s problems, which forces the OSTC to confront the real possibility of losing. When faced with a prosecution that has a genuine probability of failure, an OSTC prosecutor is highly motivated to find an off-ramp. These favorable outcomes might include the case being dismissed outright, negotiated down to a non-criminal resolution, or referred for a significantly lesser administrative action.
Defending Sensitive Accusations: Sex Crimes and the Constitution
Q: Why is the cross-examination of a child witness the most dangerous phase of a UCMJ sex assault trial?
A: The danger is tactical and moral: alienating the judge or panel without scoring any legitimate defensive points. Child testimony is susceptible to outside influence such as suggestibility and memory contamination. The defense strategy should never be to attack, shame, or bully the child.
A successful attorney must use a blend of precision, boldness, and infinite tact. Every question must focus on flaws in the memory or the investigative process itself, addressing issues like inappropriate leading questions from investigators or unexplained delays in reporting, not the child’s character.
Even in a scenario where the child is committing perjury, the attorney cannot afford to switch to attack mode. The lawyer needs to demonstrate the falsehood, if possible pinning the motive on an adult, all while maintaining the moral high ground. Any perceived bullying of the child, no matter how well-founded, risks triggering the protective instincts of every adult in the courtroom.
Q: What does it mean for a defense attorney to say the Constitution is their client in CSAM and other cases?
A: While the human being accused is always the primary client, the attorney’s duty involves defending the integrity of the Constitution and the military justice system overall. By zealously defending every client, especially those facing society’s harshest judgment, your attorney enforces fairness and ensures the government is held to its proper legal burden.
This work requires unique psychological discipline from your defense counsel:
The Hollow Leg: Defense pertaining to these cases often mandates the review of deeply traumatic material (CSAM or graphic forensic reports). The attorney must process this evidence as a completely detached, analytical professional.
Ethical Triage is Non-Negotiable: The lawyer must immediately remove all personal moral judgment to advise the client effectively. The focus shifts instantly to strategy, assessing technical legal defects (which includes chain of custody, the legal definition of possession) and potential constitutional violations. The lawyer must remain stoic and analytical regardless of the evidence’s severity.
Mitigation Pivot: In the event of an unfavorable verdict, the lawyer must engage the art of mitigation advocacy, which seeks to humanize the defendant’s journey without ever minimizing the criminal act, to build a case for a fair sentence reduction. Sentencing begins immediately after the verdict is announced, so the attorney needs to be able to handle a monumental, instantaneous shift of mood and direction gracefully and without hesitation.
The ability to operate on all of these levels simultaneously, never losing sight of the possibility of actual innocence, with complete poise and flawless judgment, is not a common skill. Many top civilian criminal defense firms simply refuse to take cases where the allegation is a crime against a child.
Q: Can a military prosecutor win an Article 120 case relying only on one witness’s word?
A: Yes. This is a fact people refuse to grasp until they are facing a court-martial panel. The military justice system can and does convict in Article 120 (sexual assault) cases based solely on the uncorroborated testimony of one person.
There is no legal requirement for physical evidence, forensic findings, eyewitnesses, or a confession. If a single witness is believed beyond a reasonable doubt, that testimony alone provides sufficient legal basis for a conviction. This is crucial strategic truth pertaining to every court-martial under the UCMJ.
The mistaken faith that a “he said, she said” charge will blow over, simply because the government lacks corroboration, is the leading cause in waiting to hire experienced UCMJ defense counsel until it’s too late (we have gotten many calls immediately following a guilty verdict in He said, She said cases).
Human Judgment and Fragile Memory
The system places immense trust in the panel’s ability to assess human judgment, perception, and memory. This is exactly where the defense must launch its concentrated effort:
Memory Isn’t Real Life: We know from forensic science that memory is a fragile thing, susceptible to the effects of trauma, suggestion, and error (confabulation). The court-martial panel relies on its ability to discern the truth, which makes focused cross-examination, rigorous case preparation, and the use of expert testimony on memory science utterly essential.
Stop Talking and Texting: The single most powerful combination of evidence the prosecution might wield is the alleged victim’s testimony with any admission from the accused. This is the factor that moves a case from a contested credibility battle to a virtually inevitable conviction. Even a minimal, coerced admission (like agreeing to the infamous “just the tip” interrogation theme) provides the corroboration necessary for a conviction. Once that admission is made, the defense is severely crippled.
That’s What “She Said”: The panel members (the military jury) are instructed that they may convict or acquit based on the word of one person if they find that word credible. Military prisons are filled with service members convicted on that basis, which underscores why you cannot afford to face a sexual assault charge without an attorney who is a master of cross-examination and forensic memory science.
Urinalysis Defense is a Thing
A Note on Case Selection: We usually don’t take a case that is solely for THC use. THC cases are notoriously difficult to beat at an Administrative Separation Board or court, and the typical administrative resolution (reprimand plus General discharge) is often too light to justify the expense and legal expertise required for a defense of our level. If, however, other hard drug use or other criminal misconduct is alleged encompassing the drug charge, that presents a major case where our involvement is crucial.
Q: Does a positive military drug test automatically end my career?
A: Absolutely not. While the military maintains a zero-tolerance policy and a positive urinalysis result is a serious situation, it does not guarantee a conviction or administrative separation. The military’s presumption is that a hot test equals wrongful use, but the law requires the government to prove that you knowingly used the substance. A positive test merely shows the drug’s metabolite is present in your system; it tells the command nothing about how it got there, when it was used, or if the test itself is scientifically valid. This lack of certainty is the core vulnerability an experienced defense counsel exploits to save your career. Even the government’s star witness, an expert toxicologist, will admit the limits of what a lab test can prove.
Q: What is the single biggest danger in a UCMJ drug case?
A: The most significant danger is making any statement without counsel. Once notified of a positive test, service members are often pressured by investigators or their command to “just tell the truth” and explain what happened. Making a statement provides the prosecution with the “knowledge” element they need to convert a mere metabolite reading into a criminal case under Article 112a. Your right to remain silent under Article 31, UCMJ, is the single most powerful tool you have. Use it. Any discussion concerning your ingestion (or lack thereof) should happen only after your attorney has received and reviewed the full laboratory packet.
Q: How does a lawyer challenge a drug test that the military calls “science”?
A: We attack the case at two simultaneous points: The science and the legal element of wrongfulness.
- Challenging the Science and Procedures: The DoD’s drug testing process is hyper-regulated by stringent instructions. Our defense begins by tearing apart the evidence to look for errors related to the collection and analysis. We scrutinize the Chain of Custody to see if every hand that touched your sample was documented. We look for procedural errors in the collection (improper observation, insufficient sealing, delayed shipment) or laboratory errors (instrument failures, cross-contamination, or invalid data). Any material deviation creates doubt about the sample’s integrity, and doubt is how you win.
- Challenging Wrongful Use: If the science holds up, we focus on knowledge. The government’s inference that use was wrongful (knowing and conscious) might be overcome by evidence of unknowing ingestion. This is a defense argument that you consumed the substance without knowing it was illegal, such as through a tampered drink, contaminated supplement, or unknowingly consuming an edible. This requires a credible, documented, and professional presentation of facts that introduces a reasonable explanation for the positive test.
Q: If a court-martial is unlikely, what are the common outcomes?
A: While the government might not pursue a Court-Martial, they will pursue administrative separation at a minimum. Drug use typically triggers mandatory administrative processing, meaning the command must start the process to kick you out. You might still have a chance to fight.
The common costs or punishments you face include:
Non-Judicial Punishment (Article 15): A formal disciplinary measure resulting in loss of pay, restriction, or reduction in rank. NJP is actually an “offer” that you can (except in rare situations) turn down in favor of a court-martial, which is a dangerous maneuver but sometimes the smartest one.
Administrative Separation Board/Board of Inquiry: These are the main options for drug cases that don’t go to court-martial. At a Separation Board, the standard of proof is lower (preponderance of the evidence), but you get an attorney, can present evidence, and cross-examine witnesses. Your objective is retention or, failing that, the most favorable characterization of service (Honorable vs. General/Other Than Honorable).
Our job is to intervene early, often before a commander or OSTC attorney has even decided how to handle the case, to present a comprehensive, evidence-backed package that shows the use was not wrongful or that retention serves the military’s interests, or to get them off the idea that the case should go to a court-martial.
Call an Ellsworth AFB UCMJ Lawyer Now
If you are facing UCMJ charges or a court-martial at Ellsworth AFB, call us at 800-319-3134 for a free consultation. We have defended Airmen at Ellsworth and other U.S. and worldwide installations for more than 20 years, and we look forward to helping you protect your future and your freedom.