Protecting Service Members Facing Non-Judicial Punishment Under the UCMJ
An Article 15 proceeding may not carry the same formal weight as a court-martial, but its consequences are anything but minor. A finding against a service member under Article 15 can result in reduction in rank, forfeiture of pay, extra duty, restriction, and a permanent mark on a military record that affects promotions, reenlistment eligibility, and the trajectory of an entire career. For officers, a referred Officer Evaluation Report can follow them indefinitely. For enlisted members, a reduction in grade can mean years of lost income and seniority.
At Corrao & Robles Law, attorney Nelson Robles represents service members facing Article 15 proceedings throughout the East Coast and in applicable federal matters. As a Judge Advocate General (JAG), he understands how these proceedings unfold from the inside — and how to build an effective response that protects a service member’s record and career.
What Is an Article 15?
Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice authorizes commanding officers to impose punishment on service members for minor offenses without resorting to a formal court-martial. This process is known as non-judicial punishment (NJP) and is used across all branches of the military, though it is referred to by different names in different branches — Captain’s Mast in the Navy and Marine Corps, and Office Hours in the Coast Guard.
While Article 15 proceedings are designed to handle less serious matters than a court-martial, the range of offenses that can be addressed through NJP is broad, and the punishments available to commanding officers are significant. More importantly, the informal nature of the proceeding does not mean that a service member’s rights are diminished — they must still be protected and asserted.
Types of Offenses Addressed Through Article 15
Article 15 proceedings can be initiated for a wide range of alleged UCMJ violations, including:
The nature and severity of the alleged offense, along with the accused’s rank and service record, typically influence how a commanding officer approaches an Article 15 proceeding and what punishment is ultimately imposed.
The Three Types of Article 15
Not all Article 15 proceedings are identical. There are three levels of NJP, each with different commanding officer authority and punishment limits.
Summarized Article 15
A summarized Article 15 is the least formal level and involves the most limited punishments. It is typically used for minor infractions and does not require the same procedural formalities as higher-level proceedings. Even so, a summarized Article 15 still results in a formal finding and can affect a service member’s record and standing.
Company Grade Article 15
A company grade Article 15 is imposed by a company-level commanding officer, typically a captain in the Army or a lieutenant in the Navy. Punishments available at this level are more significant than at the summarized level and can include forfeiture of pay, extra duty, and restriction.
Field Grade Article 15
A field grade Article 15 is imposed by a field grade officer — typically a major or above — and carries the most severe punishment authority available under NJP. Punishments at this level can include reduction in grade, forfeiture of pay for up to two months, sixty days of restriction, and forty-five days of extra duty. For enlisted service members, a field grade Article 15 represents a serious career event that deserves equally serious legal attention.
The Right to Refuse Article 15
One of the most important rights a service member has when faced with an Article 15 is the right to refuse it and demand trial by court-martial instead — with one significant exception. Service members attached to or embarked on a vessel do not have the right to refuse NJP. For all others, this decision deserves careful consideration and should never be made without experienced legal counsel.
Refusing an Article 15 and demanding a court-martial is not always the right choice. The government must prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt at a court-martial, which is a higher standard than the preponderance of evidence applied in NJP proceedings. However, a court-martial also carries greater potential penalties, a formal conviction under the UCMJ, and the possibility of a punitive discharge. Weighing these considerations carefully against the strength of the government’s evidence is a decision that requires the kind of informed legal analysis that only an experienced military defense attorney can provide.
Responding Effectively to an Article 15
Even when a service member decides to accept the Article 15 rather than demand court-martial, there is still significant work to be done. A service member has the right to present matters in defense, extenuation, and mitigation — and how effectively those matters are presented can make a meaningful difference in the punishment ultimately imposed.
Presenting a well-organized defense or mitigation package that documents a service member’s record of achievement, character references, circumstances surrounding the alleged offense, and any evidence casting doubt on the government’s account gives the commanding officer a complete picture before making a punishment decision. Commanding officers retain significant discretion under Article 15, and that discretion can be influenced by a compelling and thorough presentation.
Appealing an Article 15 Finding
A service member who believes an Article 15 was unjust or that the punishment imposed was disproportionate has the right to appeal to the next superior authority. An appeal must be submitted within a defined timeframe and should clearly articulate the specific grounds on which the finding or punishment is being challenged. Grounds for appeal can include new evidence, procedural errors, lack of sufficient evidence to support the finding, or a punishment that was excessive given the circumstances.
When to Speak With a Military Defense Attorney
Contact an attorney as soon as possible if any of the following apply:
Work With Corrao & Robles Law
An Article 15 proceeding may feel like an internal military matter, but its consequences can follow a service member for the entirety of their career. Attorney Nelson Robles brings firsthand experience with the military justice system to every case he handles, helping service members understand their rights and respond effectively at every stage of the process.
Corrao & Robles Law represents service members facing Article 15 proceedings throughout the East Coast and in applicable federal matters, and is prepared to discuss your situation in a confidential consultation.