Yes, defense counsel routinely submit written arguments to PHOs supplementing or replacing oral presentations during Article 32 hearings. Written submissions effectively present complex legal arguments, detailed factual analysis, and comprehensive disposition recommendations exceeding reasonable oral argument time. No formal requirements govern format or length, permitting tailored advocacy.
Common written arguments include legal memoranda addressing jurisdictional issues, constitutional challenges, or charge insufficiency. Factual summaries highlighting evidence weaknesses, witness credibility problems, and investigation deficiencies provide organized skepticism about government cases. Character letters, service records, and mitigation materials support alternative disposition arguments.
Timing varies from pre-hearing submissions alerting PHOs to anticipated issues through post-hearing briefs synthesizing evidence and expanding arguments. Some counsel provide proposed findings and recommendations facilitating PHO report preparation. Reply briefs addressing government arguments ensure final defense word.
Strategic benefits include presenting nuanced arguments difficult to convey orally, providing PHOs reference materials for report preparation, and demonstrating thorough preparation. Written product quality may influence PHO perception of counsel competence and case seriousness. The flexibility permits comprehensive advocacy maximizing preliminary hearing influence on ultimate case disposition. Effective written advocacy often proves more influential than time-limited oral arguments.