At age 19, Alyson Kupari joined the U.S. Air Force where she was both a weather observer and a paralegal. After serving with the Air Force at Eglin Air Force Base for six years, Kupari separated to attend school. She attended the University of Central Florida where she obtained her pre-law degree and graduated Magna Cum Laude. She was immediately accepted into the DePaul College of Law in Chicago, Illinois. Upon graduation, Kupari was offered an Associate position with a top Chicago law firm, Hinshaw & Culbertson. In 2007, she was commissioned into the Army Judge Advocate General Corps. Beginning her military service at Redstone Arsenal, Alabama, Kupari headed the Legal Assistance Division. Kupari then deployed to Iraq for a 13-month tour with the Third Infantry Division out of Fort Stewart, Georgia. During her combat deployment, Kupari performed exceptionally as an Operational Law Attorney. After her assignment with the Third Infantry Division, she PCS’d to Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri where she gained a well-known reputation as an astute, aggressive military defense lawyer. Kupari won many of her contested courts-martial trials to include several complex sexual assault cases. Kupari’s final duty station was at Fort Hood, Texas and she separated from the Army in 2014. Desiring to continue working with military members throughout the world, Kupari joined the firm and brings her enthusiasm and experience to Newsom & Gapasin, Attorneys at Law.
Achievements include graduating magna cum laude, was Airman of the Year and promoted below-the-zone (AF), 2 AFCOMs, 4 ARCOMs and Humanitarian Service Medal.
Recent cases include the following:
U.S. v. E-1. The client was a basic trainee charged with the possession of child pornography. The drill instructor unlawfully searched the Soldier’s phone and committed a serious chain of custody violations. Kupari raised a fourth amendment issue at the Article 32 and argued for the suppression of all evidence. The case was dismissed following the Article 32 hearing.
U.S. v. E-6. The client, a drill sergeant with over 18 years of service was charged with and pleaded guilty to violating Article 92 by having sexual intercourse with a trainee. He also pleaded guilty to obstruction of justice and adultery. He received minor punishment, including reduction to E-3. The day after trial, Kupari capitalized on an error committed by the Government, which restored the client to SSG and the client was permitted to retire with full benefits.
U.S. v. E-5. The client was charged under Article 120 for the aggravated sexual assault of a 13 year old child who was deaf and partially blind. After Kupari’s thorough cross examination of the alleged victim through a sign language interpreter, the defense was able to expose the mother’s motives and fabrications. The panel fully acquitted the client.
U.S. v. E-4. Client was charged with 14 specifications, including sexual assault, burglary, larceny, assault consummated by battery, violation of general orders, and communicating a threat. After a three-day hotly contested trial, the client was acquitted of all registerable sex offenses and serious offenses, and he was found guilty of only one specification of communicating a threat. Although he faced potential confinement of over 50 years, the panel sentenced client to only Article 15 type punishment with no confinement.
U.S. v. E-5. Client was a drill sergeant who was charged with five specifications of rape, forcible sodomy, and three specifications of assault consummated by a battery against a trainee. Client faced life in prison. At trial, Kupari aggressively cross examined the alleged victim, exposing many inconsistencies and exaggerations. As a result, and though the client was found guilty of some specifications, he ultimately received much lighter punishment.
U.S. v. E-4. Client was charged with committing an assault consummated by a battery and maiming his young step-son. At the Article 32, evidence was elicited that the grandmother stayed with the child during the same timeframe and had a history of violence against her own children. Since there was still some evidence to move forward to trial, the defense offered and the Convening Authority approved a Chapter 10 separation based on the results of the Article 32.
**licensed to practice in ALL MILITARY COURTS and Member of the State Bar of Illinois.