Fighting an Article 15: Know Your Rights

Can You Fight an Article 15? What Rhode Island Service Members Need to Know

Your commanding officer just handed you paperwork. You are being offered non-judicial punishment under Article 15 of the UCMJ. Your first sergeant told you to just accept it and move on. Most service members do exactly that — and many of them deeply regret it.

What most service members do not know is that they have the right to refuse an Article 15 and demand trial by court-martial instead. That decision — made in the days immediately after receiving the paperwork — can be the most important legal choice of your military career. Attorney Nelson Robles is a current Army National Guard JAG attorney who has been on both sides of this process. He knows what commanding officers look for. He knows where cases are weak. And he knows what a service member needs to understand before they make this decision.

What Is an Article 15 and Why Does It Matter?

Article 15 of the UCMJ authorizes commanding officers to impose punishment on service members for minor offenses without going through a formal court-martial. The full text is codified at 10 U.S.C. § 815. It is also called Non-Judicial Punishment or NJP. In the Navy and Marine Corps it is referred to as Captain’s Mast or Admiral’s Mast. In the Marine Corps it is also called Office Hours. Regardless of branch, your fundamental rights are governed by the same statute.

Article 15 is one of the most frequently used disciplinary tools across all branches. Commanders use it to address a wide range of offenses — from missing formation and minor insubordination to allegations involving drug use, assault, and conduct unbecoming. Despite being classified as administrative rather than criminal, the consequences can be every bit as career-altering as a formal conviction.

Punishments under Article 15 depend on the rank of both the accused and the officer imposing punishment. They can include reduction in rank, forfeiture of pay for up to two months, extra duties for up to 45 days, restriction to installation for up to 60 days, correctional custody for enlisted members, and a formal written reprimand. For officers, an Article 15 can effectively end a career even without a reduction in rank — because the reprimand and record entry alone signal to promotion boards that something went wrong.

The Long-Term Consequences Most Service Members Don’t See Coming

The immediate punishments listed above are only part of the picture. The long-term consequences of accepting an Article 15 without legal counsel are what most service members fail to fully understand — because they are making the decision alone, under pressure, with a short timeline and no attorney present.

An Article 15 conviction requires the rating official to file a negative evaluation in your permanent personnel file. In today’s highly competitive military, a negative evaluation can disqualify you from promotion consideration entirely. If you are reduced in rank at NJP and then hit high year tenure — the maximum time in service for your grade — you may be involuntarily separated from the military with no say in the outcome.

An Article 15 can also trigger a security clearance review. For service members whose career depends on maintaining a clearance — the majority of those in technical, intelligence, and special operations roles — the clearance consequences may be more severe than the punishment itself.

If you are ultimately discharged with an Other Than Honorable characterization due to misconduct originating with an Article 15, you will likely lose nearly all VA benefits — including healthcare, education benefits, and the GI Bill.

Your Right to Refuse — What Happens When You Say No

Under the UCMJ, most service members have the absolute right to refuse an Article 15 and demand trial by court-martial. This right is specifically protected under the Manual for Courts-Martial, Part V — the official Department of Defense governing document for non-judicial punishment procedures.

This right is particularly significant for Army, Air Force, and Marine Corps service members who are rarely stationed aboard vessels and therefore almost always retain the full right to refuse. Your commanding officer cannot punish you simply for exercising this right.

When you refuse, your case is referred to a court-martial. This sounds more serious — and it can be — but it means your commanding officer must now prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt before a military judge. The burden of proof is dramatically higher than in an Article 15 proceeding where your commander is both the judge and the jury.

⚡ STRATEGIC ADVANTAGE MOST SERVICE MEMBERS MISS

Demanding trial by court-martial does not guarantee a trial will occur. In many cases the command decides the time, expense, and operational impact does not justify a full court-martial. When a civilian military defense attorney sends a letter of representation and signals a fight is coming, commands frequently reduce or drop the charges entirely rather than proceed.

The Vessel Exception — Navy and Coast Guard Members

The right to refuse has one significant limitation. The vessel exception in the UCMJ allows commands to deny service members the right to demand a court-martial when they are attached to or embarked in a vessel. This exception was created in 1962 to give the Navy flexibility in disciplining sailors at sea.

However, in 2023 the Navy announced changes expanding the circumstances in which sailors can refuse NJP. If you are a Navy or Coast Guard member and you believe your vessel was in non-operational status at the time of your Article 15 proceedings, an experienced military defense attorney can analyze whether you had the right to refuse and whether a successful appeal is available.

When Should You Fight an Article 15?

The decision to fight an Article 15 requires careful analysis of the specific facts, evidence, and long-term career implications of your individual case. There is no universal answer — which is exactly why this decision should never be made without first consulting an attorney.

Strong reasons to refuse and fight:

• The underlying facts are disputed and you have credible evidence supporting your version of events.

• The punishment offered is career-ending regardless of the outcome — you have nothing additional to lose by demanding a higher standard of proof.

• The offense, if proven, would result in an Other Than Honorable discharge, loss of VA benefits, or federal conviction.

• A security clearance is at stake.

• You have reason to believe your commanding officer has a personal bias or is motivated by factors other than good order and discipline.

Reasons accepting may be the strategic choice:

• The evidence against you is overwhelming and multiple witnesses corroborate the allegations.

• The punishment offered is relatively minor compared to the maximum punishments available at court-martial.

• A formal court-martial conviction would follow you into civilian life as a federal criminal record.

The key insight is that accepting an Article 15 is not always weakness and refusing is not always strength. The right answer depends entirely on the specific facts of your case — and that analysis requires an attorney who knows military law from the inside.

Your Rights at the Article 15 Hearing

Even if you decide to accept an Article 15, you have significant rights during the hearing that most service members fail to fully exercise. These rights are established under the Uniform Code of Military Justice and include the following:

1. Right to personal appearance before the officer imposing punishment.

2. Right to remain silent under Article 31(b) of the UCMJ — you cannot be compelled to testify against yourself.

3. Right to present evidence and call witnesses on your behalf.

4. Right to a spokesperson — which can be a civilian defense attorney.

5. Right to appeal within five days of the imposition of punishment to the next higher commander. This window is short and must be filed promptly.

Why Having an Attorney Before You Respond Changes Everything

You typically have between 48 and 72 hours to respond to an Article 15 — sometimes less. Most service members make this decision without ever consulting an attorney. That is a mistake that often cannot be corrected after the fact.

An experienced military defense attorney can review the complete evidence package the command has assembled, identify weaknesses and procedural errors in the government’s case, assess whether the alleged conduct meets the legal standard for the charged offense, advise on the strategic calculation between accepting and refusing, and begin building your defense immediately if you refuse.

After the Article 15 — What Comes Next

Even after an Article 15 is resolved the work is not over. The record remains in your military personnel file and continues to affect promotions, reenlistment decisions, security clearance adjudications, and separation proceedings for years.

In many cases an Article 15 becomes the foundation for administrative separation proceedings — a separate process with its own hearings, evidence standards, and appeal pathways. The decisions made during the Article 15 process directly affect your position at a subsequent separation board.

Rhode Island Service Members — We Are Here 24/7

Corrao & Robles Law represents active duty service members, National Guard members, and Reservists across Rhode Island and Massachusetts facing Article 15 proceedings, court-martial charges, administrative separation boards, and security clearance defense. Attorney Nelson Robles is a current Army National Guard JAG — the only attorney in Rhode Island actively serving in the JAG Corps while practicing civilian military defense.

If you or a service member you know has received Article 15 paperwork, do not make this decision alone. The decision you make in the next 48 to 72 hours can affect the next 20 years of your military career. Your consultation is free and completely confidential. Call or text (401) 445-4562 or visit CorraoRoblesLaw.com to speak with Attorney Nelson Robles today.