Article 133 UCMJ | Conduct Unbecoming of an Officer and a Gentleman

Facing an Article 133 Allegation for Conduct Unbecoming of an Officer? Don’t go it alone.  Military Law Center can help.

Article 133, UCMJ, states any commissioned officer, cadet, or midshipman who is convicted of conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

Elements:

1. That the accused did or omitted to do a certain act;
2. That, under the circumstances, the act or omission constitution conduct unbecoming an officer and gentleman.

The terms found within the statute above in Article 133 have specific definitions to help explain an all-encompassing offense.  The following definitions apply:

Gentleman: As used in this article, gentleman includes both male and female commissioned officers, cadets, and midshipmen.  The term “gentleman” connotes failings in an officer’s personal character, regardless of gender.

Nature of the Offense: Conduct violative of this article is action or behavior in an official capacity which, in dishonoring or disgracing the person as an officer, seriously compromises the officer’s character as a gentleman, or action or behavior in an unofficial or private capacity which, in dishonoring or disgracing the officer personally, seriously compromises the person’s standing as an officer.

• There are certain moral attributes common to the ideal officer and the perfect gentleman, a lack of which is indicated by acts of dishonesty, unfair dealing, indecency, indecorum, lawlessness, injustice, or cruelty.
• Not everyone is or can be expected to meet unrealistically high moral standards, but there is a limit of tolerance based on customs of the Service and military necessity below which the personal standards of an officer, cadet, or midshipman cannot fall without seriously compromising the person’s standing as a gentleman.
• Article 133 prohibits conduct by a commissioned officer, cadet, or midshipman which, taking all the circumstances into consideration, is thus compromising.
• Article 133 includes acts made punishable by any other UCMJ article, provided these acts amount to conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman.
• A commissioned officer who steals property violates both Article 133 and Article 121.  Whenever the offense charged is the same as a specific offense set forth in the UCMJ, the elements of proof are the same as those set forth in the paragraph which treats that specific offense, with the additional requirement that the act or omission constitutes conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman

Instances of violation of Article 133 include knowingly making a false official statement; dishonorable failure to pay a debt; cheating on an exam; opening and reading a letter of another without authority; using insulting or defamatory language to another officer in that officer’s presence or about that officer to other military persons; being drunk and disorderly in a public place; public association with known prostitutes; committing or attempting to commit a crime involving moral turpitude; and failing without good cause to support the officer’s family.

An Article 133 charge at court-martial is serious, can stop a military career, and even warrant brig time and a dismissal.  But there are defenses available to fight the accusation.  The first issue is to address the officer received fair notice that the misconduct is forbidden and subject to criminal sanctions.

• Failure to State an Offense:
  As prosecutors often add the Article 133 charge in addition to other misconduct, they tend to assume conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentlemen is obvious.  But a savvy defense attorney will immediately file a motion with the court requesting the charge be dismissed for failing to state an offense.
• Void for Vagueness:
  Government prosecutors will also alleged a convoluted theory for how the conduct in question violates the UCMJ.  Attacking the charge and specification for being void for vagueness is another defense strategy to employ.
• No Notice:
  Before an officer, cadet, or midshipman be convicted under Article 133, the military must provide “due process” and “fair notice.”  For notice, a court will ask whether a “reasonable military officer would have no doubt that the activities charged constituted conduct unbecoming an officer.”  United States v. Frazier, 34 MJ 194, 198 (C.M.A. 1994).

An Article 133 accusation for conduct unbecoming an officer can be a frightening experience. Military Law Center is here to help you navigate this challenging situation. Our team of experienced military defense lawyers, comprised of former JAGs, understands the intricacies of the UCMJ and officer misconduct cases. We’ll fight tirelessly to protect your rights and career.

An Article 129 charge is serious, can stop a military career, and even warrant brig time.  But there are defenses available to fight the accusation:

• Alibi:
  “Alibi” means that the accused could not have committed the offense charged because the accused was at another place when the offense occurred.  As this defense allows the accused to show he or she was not the person who kidnapped a person at a certain time or place, the government will be unable to meet its burden of proof.  The burden remains on the prosecution to demonstrate the accused’s guilt. 
• Insufficient Evidence:
  The government is required to bring “proof beyond a reasonable doubt” to secure a conviction.  Showing the government lacks sufficient evidence to meet its burden is a defense at trial.
• No Intent:
  Showing the accused lacked the requisite intent is a defense.

The maximum punishment for Article 133 is a dismissal, confinement for one year or for the most analogous offense for which punishment is prescribed, total forfeitures of pay and allowances.

The potential penalties for offenses in the military under Article 133 vary on the specification charged by the prosecution. A court-martial can impose a range of punishments, including:

• Confinement: The accused may face imprisonment for a specific period determined by the court-martial.
• Reduction in rank: This could involve a demotion to a lower officer rank.
• Forfeiture of pay and allowances: The accused may lose a portion of their military pay and benefits.
• Reprimand or admonition: These are punishments involving official censure of the accused’s actions.

The specific maximum punishment for an Article 133 offense will depend on how the government presents its case and how many separate specifications the officer is facing.  Our attorneys at the Military Law Center can help estimate your maximum exposure for your case during a free consultation.

The military has the option of charging an accused with Article 133 offenses at a court martial or choosing to use the board of inquiry process.  All military services prohibit conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman.  A board of inquiry for Article 133 offenses is a more challenging environment for an officer to win because the burden of proof is far lower than that required at a court martial.  

Despite the easier burden for the government, attorneys at the Military Law Center have successfully defended service members facing conduct unbecoming an officer.  With diligent investigation and excellent courtroom presence, our attorneys have defeated these allegations in the past.  By strategically planning a defense, preparing early, and critically analyzing the evidence, our Board of Inquiry attorneys can help get your military career back on track.

When a service member is arrested for a crime or becomes “titled” in a law enforcement investigation, their security clearance may be in jeopardy.  Service members may receive a Request for Supplemental Information (RSI) from the Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency (DSCA).  DSCA is required to review a service member’s eligibility for an active security clearance when they are charged with or convicted of any criminal offenses (excluding traffic violations that do not involve alcohol or drugs, resulting in fines less than $300) since the last investigation pursuant to DoDM 5200.02. 

As any response to DSCA may be used against a service member later at a board of inquiry or court martial, it is paramount to consult with a qualified military law attorney with experience handling security clearance issues.  Effective responses to a request for supplemental information will use the 2017 National Security Adjudicative Guidelines, Security Executive Agent Directive 4.

An arrest and conviction for conduct unbecoming an officer can have devastating consequences beyond the courtroom. It can damage your reputation within the military, stall your career progression, and potentially hinder future job opportunities in the civilian sector.

Additionally, service members may be precluded from ownership, receipt, or transport of any firearm that has been transported in interstate or foreign commerce under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(6) when the accused separates from the military with a dismissal or is convicted of an offense punishable with more than one year of confinement.

Facing an Article 133 accusation for conduct unbecoming an officer and gentleman can be terrifying.  It probably feels like your world is caving in.  At Military Law Center, our dedicated attorneys understand the challenges you’re facing, and we’re here to help. Here’s what sets us apart:

• Experienced Military Defense Lawyers:
  Our team is comprised of former military judge advocates (JAGs) with a deep understanding of military law and the UCMJ. We’ve successfully defended countless service members facing all kinds of allegations, and we know how to litigate the complexities of officer misconduct cases in the military justice realm from start to finish.
• Personalized Attention:
  We care for every client as an individual. We’ll take the time to understand your specific situation and develop a personalized defense strategy, to include rehabilitation options, designed to achieve the best possible outcome.
• Aggressively Protecting Your Rights:
  We’re committed to fighting for your rights and ensuring you receive fair treatment throughout the legal process. We’ll explore all available defenses and work tirelessly to protect your career and reputation.
• Clear Communication:
  We understand legal terms can be confusing. We’ll keep you informed about the progress of your case and explain everything in clear, understandable terms.
• Free Consultation:
  We offer a free consultation to discuss your situation and answer any questions you may have. This allows you to make informed decisions about your defense strategy.

Don’t Face Article 133 Allegations Alone. Military Law Center Can Help.

An Article 133 charge can take away your gun rights and security clearance, stall your military career, and damage your personal and professional reputation. But you don’t have to fight by yourself. Military Law Center has a proven track record of successfully defending service members facing the most serious charges like burglary and getting them the help they need. Our experienced military law attorneys understand the military justice system and will work tirelessly to protect your rights and achieve the best possible outcome for your case. 

Contact Military Law Center today for a free consultation.
We’ll stand by your side and fight for you.

Call Us Today – (760) 536-9038