The Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals has reversed a military judge's decision to dismiss stalking charges against Private First Class Carlos S. Delucio. This ruling, made on October 30, 2026, is significant as it allows the prosecution to move forward with allegations of domestic violence and stalking against Delucio, which could have serious implications for his military career and personal life.

The case arose from multiple charges against Delucio related to domestic violence and stalking an intimate partner. The dismissal of the stalking charge by the military judge raised concerns about the legal standards for what constitutes a valid charge in military courts. The court's ruling clarifies the requirements for stalking specifications under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).

Background

In December 2025, the Office of Special Trial Counsel charged Delucio with several offenses concerning domestic violence against an intimate partner. These incidents allegedly occurred between November 24, 2024, and December 31, 2024. On February 2, 2026, an additional charge of stalking was added, which was referred to a general court-martial on April 14, 2026.

On May 28, 2026, Delucio's defense filed a motion to dismiss the stalking charge, arguing that it failed to state an offense and was vague. The prosecution later provided a bill of particulars, detailing the stalking allegations, including incidents of constant communication and threats made by Delucio against his partner. However, the military judge dismissed the stalking charge on June 16, 2026, leading to the government's appeal.

The Ruling

The Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals ruled that the military judge erred in dismissing the stalking charge. The court stated, "the specification as referred does state an offense." The judges emphasized that the stalking specification included all necessary elements and provided sufficient notice to Delucio regarding the charges against him.

The court clarified that a specification must allege each element of the charged offense, provide notice of the charge, and protect against double jeopardy. In this case, the court found that the stalking specification met these requirements, as it tracked the statute and detailed the conduct that allegedly constituted stalking.

Impact

This ruling has significant implications for military justice. By reversing the dismissal, the court allows the prosecution to proceed with the stalking charge, which could lead to a court-martial and potential consequences for Delucio, including disciplinary action or discharge from the military. The decision also reinforces the standards for what constitutes a valid charge in military courts, ensuring that defendants receive adequate notice of the allegations against them.

The ruling may also influence future cases involving stalking and domestic violence within the military, as it clarifies the legal framework for such charges. It highlights the importance of precise language in legal specifications and the necessity for the prosecution to provide clear evidence of the alleged conduct.

What's Next

The case will be remanded to the military judge for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. Delucio may still have the opportunity to appeal any future rulings made during the court-martial process. The outcome of this case will be closely watched, as it reflects ongoing issues concerning domestic violence and accountability within military ranks.