Inside the Army Legal Internship
A FLEP Candidate’s Experience at Fort Bliss
By Captain Diane R. Petit-Bois
Article published on: February 1, 2026 in the Army Lawyer 2025 Issue 4
Read Time: < 2 mins
Interns and JAs (including CPT Petit-Bois, far left) learn about the history behind Old Ironside and see how Army units maintain readiness during Motorpool Monday at the 16th Engineering Battalion. (Photo courtesy of author)
As a U.S. Army Military Police officer selected for the Funded Legal Education Program (FLEP), I approached my summer internship at the Office of the Staff Judge Advocate (OSJA) for 1st Armored Division and Fort Bliss with the mindset of becoming a future counselor. Up until that point, law enforcement and Soldier-focused development shaped my professional life. This internship offered something different: a deeper understanding of the legal backbone that supports everything from discipline to operational readiness.
During my time at Fort Bliss, I witnessed how military justice extends far beyond the courtroom. Observing administrative separations under Army Regulation 635-2001 gave me a fresh appreciation for the stakes involved in characterizations of service. These decisions affect a Soldier’s immediate separation and ripple through their long-term access to benefits and employment opportunities. While under the administrative law section, I learned that legal reviews are not just procedural; they are critical assessments aimed at preserving fairness and ensuring commanders receive sound counsel before making life-altering decisions.
Civilian and FLEP summer interns stand with COL Michael Friess, Military Judge, following an engaging discussion on career pathways within the JAG Corps. From left to right: Jose Medina (University of Puerto Rico), Taylor Mayo (Penn State Law), CPT David Hazelton (Harvard Law), COL Michael Friess, CPT Diane Petit-Bois (Florida A&M University), and Zachary Sickler (Penn State Law). (Photo courtesy of author)
Although I had not yet taken a formal evidence course, I observed how discovery obligations were discussed and applied during my time in the military justice section. Conversations surrounding Brady v. Maryland2 and Giglio v. United States3 emphasized the foundational role of ethical disclosure within military justice. I came to understand that legal transparency is not just a procedural requirement, but a professional ethic that safeguards both the integrity of the system and the rights of the accused. These discussions gave me an early and lasting appreciation for the defense’s entitlement to exculpatory and impeachment evidence, and the Government’s obligation to pursue justice.
Courtroom experiences stood out as defining moments of the internship. The judge’s questions struck a careful balance between fact-finding and protecting the accused’s rights. From my own experiences, I understand that emotions can run high in field incidents, but inside the courtroom, the focus was clarity, intent, and fairness.
Throughout my time with the OSJA, I also participated in legal professional development sessions covering topics like unreasonable multiplication of charges and “naked” pleas—guilty pleas without an agreement with the convening authority. These sessions were not lectures; they were collaborative discussions where judge advocates encouraged our input and sharpened our understanding. I also observed voir dire during the selection of a court-martial panel. It offered a powerful reminder of how personality, perception, and even subtle phrasing can impact a panel.
CPT Petit-Bois receives hands-on exposure to Bradley Fighting Vehicles and Joint Assault Bridges during Motorpool Monday at the 16th Engineering Battalion. (Photo courtesy of author)
In my 2L year as a FLEP candidate, I carry the lessons this internship instilled in me. Above all, I carry the understanding that every legal decision leaves a lasting imprint and that excellence in this profession requires discipline, dedication, and the grit to see justice through. This internship reaffirmed my commitment to the Judge Advocate General’s Corps, and I could not be more excited to finish law school and begin this next chapter. TAL
Notes
1. U.S. Dep’t of Army, Regul. 635-200, Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations (30 June 2025).
2. Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963).
3. Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972).
Author
CPT Petit-Bois is a 2L at Florida A&M University College of Law in Orlando, Florida.