1.
Do you rely on civilian law enforcement to investigate and
prosecute sexual assault cases against members of your Guard unit?
We do work alongside civilian law enforcement (LE) to investigate
allegations of sexual assault. Our training bases normally fall under either
state jurisdiction or concurrent state/federal jurisdiction so that there
are no jurisdictional impediments to having local LE investigate suspected
incidents. In accordance with California Military and Veterans Code (CMVC)
Section 470.5, service members of the California Military Department (i.e.
California National Guard) who commit sexual assault are subject to
prosecution by a state district attorney. The California Military
Department may prosecute instances of sexual assault under the UCMJ (as
incorporated into California Law through CMVC Sections 101 and 102) only
when those cases are refused by civilian prosecutors.
2.
Does your state UCMJ have any specific language regarding
investigating or prosecuting sexual assault cases? If so, please provide
some details or the specific statute.
Yes. Our state UCMJ mirrors the federal UCMJ with only slight differences;
therefore, the changes to Article 32 pretrial investigation and Article 120
offenses are immediately incorporated into CA law through CMVC Sections 101
and 102. In addition, there has been a recent law change in 2014 with the
addition of CMVC Section 58 and Section 470.5. Section 58 requires the
California Military Department to file an annual report to the governor and
state legislature that describes the policies and processes that are in
place to prevent sexual assault, an assessment of the effectiveness of these
policies, the number of reported sexual assaults, and future plans for
prevention. Section 470.5 states that service members of the California
Military Department who commit sexual assault are subject to prosecution by
a state district attorney. The California Military Department may prosecute
instances of sexual assault under the UCMJ (as incorporated into California
Law through CMVC Sections 101 and 102) only when those cases are refused by
civilian prosecutors.
3.
Does your state UCMJ allow you to do the equivalent of an Article
32 hearing in the federal system? If so, under what circumstances?
Yes. CA mirrors the rules and procedures of the federal UCMJ to include the
recent changes to Article 32 hearings.
4.
Is there a statute of limitations for sexual assault against
members of the military? If so, what is the length?
No, the statute of limitations was removed by the enactment of CMVC 470.5.
There is no statute of limitations for a California guardsman to be charged
with a qualifying sexual assault offense, when tried and punished by a
general court-martial.
5.

When was your UCMJ last updated?

 Through CMVC 101 & 102, it updates continually when the federal UCMJ is
updated. State-specific provisions, such as the enactment of CMVC 58 and
470.5, were completed in 2014.
6.
Are you currently pursuing any changes to your UCMJ in relation to
rape or sex assault?
No, not at present. Our most recent change in 2014 and the incorporated
changes of the Federal UCMJ have aligned our processes and procedures with
the current federal rules and leverage the investigatory capabilities and
prosecutorial authority of civilian agencies while maintaining an
independent ability to prosecute military members through the state
court-martial system.
7.
In the last five years, have you held a court martial as a result
of a sexual assault allegation within your Guard unit?
Yes. Since May 2010, five (5) California state courts-martial have been
convened to consider cases involving charges of sexual misconduct.
2012-Summary Court-Marital of Sergeant (E-5). Result: Acquittal of alleged
Aggravated Sexual Contact.
2012-General Court-Martial of Sergeant (E-5) for alleged Rape. Result:
Acquittal.
2012-General Court-Martial of Sergeant First Class (E-7) for alleged Sexual
Assault. Result: Acquitted of Sexual Assault; Convicted of Assault,
Maltreatment of a Subordinate, False Official Statement, Engaging in
Prohibited Relationship, Adultery. Originally sentenced to 60 days
confinement, reduction to Private (E-1), and Bad Conduct Discharge. Upon
appeal, sentence was vacated, currently pending resentencing.
2013-Special Court-Martial of Specialist (E-4). Result: Convicted of
Aggravated Sexual Assault. Sentenced to Bad Conduct Discharge. Automatic
Reduction to Private (E-1); mandatory Sex Offender Registration.
2015-General Court-Martial. Result: Convicted of Sexual Assault. Sentenced
to Bad Conduct Discharge, Reduction to Airman First Class (E-3). Mandatory
Sex Offender Registration. Pending Appeal.
8.
In the last five years, have you meted out any of the following
punishments resulting from a sex assault allegation made against a member of
your unit?
Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) may only be imposed by a Special Court Martial
with Authority to Issue BCD, and General Court-Martial. Dishonorable
Discharge may only be issued by a General Court-Martial. While we have had
several state Court-Martials of cases that were turned-down by civilian

 prosecutors, we also take adverse administrative action against service
members who are convicted of sexual assault by civilian prosecutors. In
effect, our state Court-Martial system offers sexual assault victims an
added layer of prosecutorial protection in the event that civilian
prosecutors refuse to prosecute their case.
Our mandatory reporting policy requires service members to report
convictions of any type. Adverse Administrative actions such as termination
from full-time status, GOMORs, Withdrawal of Federal Recognition (officers),
Adverse Administrative Separation (enlisted), Revocation of security
clearance, Bar to Re-enlistment, Withdrawal of Military Occupational
Specialty (MOS), and other actions ensure that sexual predators are not
allowed to continue their military service with the California Military
Department. Officer and enlisted separation boards may result in discharge
as Under Other Than Honorable Conditions; General, Under Honorable
Conditions; or Honorable. We also have the authority to impose non-judicial
punishment which can result in reduction, forfeiture, restriction, extra
duty or reprimand.
Although the California National Guard needs to remain vigilant with
prosecuting these heinous acts, we received positive feedback that our
approach is working. In October 2014 the Department of Defense awarded our
program with the Sexual Assault Prevention Award. This award recognized
California as the state whose National Guard made the greatest impact in
sexual assault prevention during the past year.