Yesterday we discussed the case of United States v. Burch and the quest for meaningful appellate relief. Today an alert reader called our attention to an article in the current issue of the Marine Corps Times casting doubt on whether DFAS will actually provide monetary relief as a result of any appellate ruling short of a complete reversal without retrial. William H. McMichael, Ruling: Pay restoration is not guaranteed, Marine Corps Times, Feb. 23, 2009, at 18. Unfortunately, the article appears to be available to subsribers only. I hope I can offer this much of the lede without offending copyright protections:
When a military judge reverses or sets aside a court-martial verdict and a new trial is not ordered, all rights and privileges — including back pay — are restored to the accused.
But if a sentence is merely reduced, pay restoration is not automatic.
McMichael reports that DFAS makes case-by-case determinations as to whether to restore money in other cases.