I would think it would help, but I suppose it depends on what you did in the military, and what the resumes look like of the rest of the applicant pool. People love to make predictions but at the end of the day, we don’t really know who we’re “up against”. I thought my resume was pretty interesting, for my age, considering I also have two kids, but I’ve come to realize it’s pretty unexceptional compared to a lot of high-achievers applying to law school 😆
My gut tells me military experience shows dedication, discipline, etc.
If your GPA is decent, you do well on the LSAT, and you can write a good personal statement, you certainly stand a strong chance!
R v Miller. Criminal law case where a squatter lights a cigarette then falls asleep. He awakes to find the mattress he's sleeping on is on fire. Instead of attempting to put it out or vacating the premises he gets up, goes to a different room, and goes back to his nap. Next time he wakes up the whole house is on fire.
Meads v. Meads
 OPCA litigants do not express any stereotypic beliefs other than a general rejection of court and state authority; nor do they fall into any common social or professional association. Arguments and claims of this nature emerge in all kinds of legal proceedings and all levels of Courts and tribunals. This group is unified by:
1. a characteristic set of strategies (somewhat different by group) that they employ,
2. specific but irrelevant formalities and language which they appear to believe are (or portray as) significant, and
3. the commercial sources from which their ideas and materials originate.
This category of litigant shares one other critical characteristic: they will only honour state, regulatory, contract, family, fiduciary, equitable, and criminal obligations if they feel like it. And typically, they don’t.