Mihail Kogălniceanu: America's Deployment Hub on the Black Sea
On the Black Sea coast of Romania, just inland from the port city of Constanța, Mihail Kogălniceanu Air Base, MK to the troops who deploy there, is the center of gravity for the American presence on NATO's eastern flank. A rotational force of U.S. Soldiers cycles through on deployments of months at a time to deter Russian aggression along the Black Sea, and the base is being built up into one of the largest in NATO. This remains an important rotational posting, supported by U.S. Army Garrison Black Sea, with deployed Soldiers living a long way from home as the installation expands, with Constanța and the beach resorts of Mamaia just down the road. A command on a high profile deterrence mission has every reason to be seen enforcing discipline hard.
A serious charge on a deployment, far out on the eastern flank, is no place to rely on whoever happens to be nearest. Court martial defense is all Bilecki Law Group does, and the firm has taken its cases across Europe from its office in Tampa. We fly in to wherever the case is, because for a contested matter what matters is the lawyer's trial experience, not the distance to the Black Sea.
The Pilot Who Would Not Turn Back at Ploesti
Romania is where America flew one of the most daring air missions of the war. On August 1, 1943, B-24 bombers came in low over the oil refineries at Ploesti, and among the pilots was Second Lieutenant Lloyd "Pete" Hughes, barely past his early twenties. Flak tore open his fuel tanks on the run in, and with gasoline streaming from the wing and the target a wall of fire ahead, he had every reason to pull up and turn for home. He flew straight into it instead, held his line over the blazing refinery, and put his bombs on the objective before the plane went down. He would not break off with the job undone. That refusal to turn back is the standard we bring to a case at MK.
Why Soldiers at MK Bring Us In
We win court martial cases. Military defense is all we do, and Soldiers fly us in from all over the world because of our trial record. The military justice system is not built to find the truth; it exists to preserve good order and discipline, and a command on a watched deterrence mission will make an example of a Soldier to show the alliance it holds the standard. A serious case is investigated by Army CID, and for sexual assault and other covered offenses the decision to refer charges to a court martial no longer belongs to your command but goes to an independent Special Trial Counsel. Your Trial Defense Service counsel may be capable but carries a heavy caseload inside the same system, which is why Soldiers serious about winning bring in their own counsel.
UCMJ Charges We Defend at MK
We handle every type of court martial at MK. The charges below are the ones we see most, not the only ones we take.
Sexual Assault and Sex Offenses (UCMJ Article 120 / Article 134). These allegations route to an independent Special Trial Counsel now, and the command treats a report as established before the investigation is finished, all the more so on a small deployed base where a case draws attention fast and the command wants to look decisive. These cases demand counsel who will run an independent investigation and contest the case rather than let the allegation stand in for proof, because a conviction means confinement, a federal record, and a place on a sex offender registry.
Domestic Violence and Assault (UCMJ Articles 128b and 128). Domestic violence under Article 128b is charged as aggressively as any offense in the UCMJ since the Office of Special Trial Counsel took these cases over. It covers a spouse, an intimate partner, or a family member, and it treats strangulation or suffocation as its own charge that the government can bring even with no visible injury. A qualifying conviction also triggers the federal Lautenberg firearms bar, which can end an Army career because a Soldier has to be able to carry a weapon. We also defend assault under Article 128, where self defense is a recognized defense.
Larceny and Government Property (UCMJ Articles 121 and 108). A rotational force that deploys in and redeploys out moves a great deal of equipment, and an expeditionary base run on hand receipts and containerized stock is where accountability cases are born. The government treats missing gear, an item that cannot be reconciled, or property that walked off as larceny under Article 121 or wrongful disposition of military property under Article 108, but a shortage on a hand receipt in the churn of a rotation is not the same as theft, and the government still has to prove the state of mind required by the charged offense: intent for larceny or fraud, or negligence where Article 108 permits it, not just that something cannot be found.
Drugs and Off Duty Conduct (UCMJ Articles 112a and 134). Drug cases often turn on the chain of custody and the government's burden to prove any use was knowing and wrongful. A Soldier is subject to the UCMJ off duty, so a night out on the Mamaia beach strip or anywhere off base that ends badly comes back to the command. A serious off base matter in Romania can also be taken up by the Romanian police and prosecuted in a Romanian court, on a separate track from your command, so get counsel involved before you talk to anyone.
A Career and a Reputation Worth Defending
We do not pretend that every Soldier who calls us from Romania is innocent. What matters is how serious the case is, not your rank. If a matter is genuinely minor, your Trial Defense Service counsel can handle it, and we will tell you so honestly. But when the case is serious, everything is on the line at once: your career, your retirement, your good name, and your freedom. A court martial conviction is a federal criminal conviction, and where the sentencing parameters apply, a judge sentences within a set confinement range, two and a half to ten years for sexual assault and ten to twenty for rape, and must state specific facts in writing to support a departure, along with any required or adjudged punitive discharge and, on a covered sex offense, sex offender registration. That is why you fight. The court’s jurisdiction and the convicted offense determine which sentencing rules apply; some offenses use separate sentencing criteria rather than these ranges.
If you are facing an investigation or court martial at MK, reach out for a free defense strategy session. We will tell you exactly what you are facing and how we would defend it. The government is already building its case. The only question is whether anyone is building yours.
FAQ
I'm on a rotation to Romania. If I'm charged, where does my case actually get handled?
By your deployed command, and likely not in Romania. The rotational task force here answers to a parent command, and a serious case is convened and tried through that command, which usually means it follows the unit rather than being tried on the ground in Constanța. What happens here is the investigation, and the investigation is where these cases are shaped, so the most valuable thing you can do is get your own counsel involved while you are still in country and the record is being built.
Army CID wants to interview me at MK. Do I have to talk to them?
No. You are not required to sit for a CID interview or answer their questions. Under Article 31b of the UCMJ you have the right to remain silent and to a lawyer, and you can invoke both at any point, including before the interview begins. CID is collecting evidence, not giving you a chance to explain, and it takes very little to be titled as a subject, a label that follows you for years. Decline, ask for counsel, and call a defense lawyer before you give any statement.
Something happened off base in Constanța or Mamaia. Could the Romanian authorities get involved too?
They can. Romania is a NATO host nation, and an off base incident can draw the Romanian police under the agreement that governs U.S. forces here, on a separate track from the UCMJ case your command is pursuing. Investigations in the two systems may overlap, and what you say to one can affect the other, so do not give a statement to anyone until you have talked to a defense lawyer. The SOFA allocates primary jurisdiction and limits a second trial for the same offense; overlapping investigations do not mean that both countries may freely try the same charge.