Article 122a | Receiving Stolen Property

Facing an Article 122a Charge for Receiving Stolen Property?  Were you Arrested for Receiving Stolen Property? Don’t go it alone.  Military Law Center can help.

The Manual for Courts-Martial, under Article 122a (10 U.S.C. 922a), states any person subject to the UCMJ who wrongfully receives, buys, or conceals stolen property, knowing the property to be stole property, shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

Receiving stolen property under Article 122a can be proven by the government at court-martial or administrative hearing by showing the service member knew the property was stolen and they tried to buy or accept it.  The prosecution needs to prove the elements below.

Receiving Stolen Property Elements:

1. That the accused wrongfully received, bought, or concealed certain property of some value;
2. That the property belonged to another person;
3. That the property had been stolen; and
4. That the accused knew that the property had been stolen.

The terms found within the statute above in Article 122a have specific definitions.  The following definitions apply:

In General: The actual thief is not criminally liable for receiving the property stolen; however a principal to the larceny, when not the actual thief, may be found guilty of knowingly receiving the stolen property but may not be found guilty of both the larceny and receiving the property.

Knowledge: Actual knowledge that the property was stolen is required.  Knowledge may be proved by circumstantial evidence.

Wrongfulness: Receiving stolen property is wrongful if it is without justification or excuse.  For example, it would not be wrongful for a person to receive stolen property for the purpose of returning it to its rightful owner, or for a law enforcement officer to seize it as evidence.

Pursuant to Rule for Court-Martial 305, a Commanding Officer may order a service member into pretrial confinement for receiving stolen property under Article 122a.  The Commanding Officer may place the service member in the brig, not as punishment, but to protect society from the necessary risk of the accused committing another serious offense.

Attorneys at the Military Law Center help those confined in the brig pretrial seek release at their Initial Review Officer (IRO) hearing.  At an IRO hearing, a neutral and detached officer shall review the probable cause determination and necessity for continued pretrial confinement.  The IRO will consider whether:

• An Article 122a offense triable by court-martial has been committed;
• The confine committed it;
• Confinement is necessary because it is foreseeable that:
  • The confine will not appear at trial, pretrial hearing, or preliminary hearing; or
  • The confine will engage in serious criminal misconduct; and
• Less severe forms of restraint are inadequate.

As an accused, you have the right to require your command present a preponderance of evidence at the IRO hearing to prove why you should remain in pretrial confinement.  Working with experienced military attorneys for IRO hearings is the first step to showing your command you will fight for your freedom!

Are you facing an Article 122a accusation for receiving stolen property? Did you unknowingly buy or accept stolen goods and now face serious consequences? Don’t wait. Military Law Center can protect your rights and fight for your future. We understand the complexities of Article 122a charges and have a proven track record of success in defending service members. Contact us today for a free consultation and discuss your case with an experienced military defense attorney.

An Article 122a 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 took the property 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. 
• Mistake of Fact:
  A mistake of fact defense for receiving stolen property is a complete defense to the charge and specification under Article 122a.  If the accused reasonably believed the property they tried to buy was lawfully owned by the seller, rather than stolen, that would be a complete defense to the charge.
• Insufficient Evidence: 
  The government has the burden of proof at a criminal court-martial—beyond a reasonable doubt.  Skilled attorneys can point to holes in the government’s evidence to present a defense of insufficient evidence.

The maximum punishment for Article 122a is a dishonorable discharge, confinement for 3 years, total forfeitures of pay and allowances, reduction in rank to E-1, and other lawful punishments—when the value of the stolen property was more than $1,000.

Receiving Stolen Property $1,000 or More

• Dishonorable Discharge or Dismissal (Officers)
• Confinement for 3 Years
• Total Forfeitures
• Reduction in Rank to E-1

Receiving Stolen Property Less than $1,000

• Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD)
• Confinement for 1 Year
• Total Forfeitures
• Reduction in Rank to E-1

The potential penalties for offenses in the military under Article 122a vary on the seriousness of the offense and the value of the property stolen. 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 enlisted grade or officer rank.
• Forfeiture of pay and allowances: The accused may lose a portion of their military pay and benefits.
• Bad-conduct discharge: This is a less severe form of separation with a negative characterization, potentially impacting future employment opportunities and veteran benefits.
• Reprimand or admonition: These are non-judicial punishments involving official censure of the accused’s actions.

The specific maximum punishment for an Article 122a offense will depend on how the government presents its case and how many separate specifications the accused is facing.  Our attorneys at the Military Law Center can help provide a maximum punishment for your case during a free consultation.

The military has the option of charging an accused with receiving stolen property offenses at a court martial or choosing to use the administrative separation board process.  All military services prohibit service members from receiving stolen property.  An ADSEP Board for Article 122a offenses is a more challenging environment for an accused to win because the burden of proof for the government 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 receiving stolen property allegations.  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 ADSEP Board lawyers can help get your military career back on track.

When a service member is arrested for receiving stolen property 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 an ADSEP Board or court martial, it is paramount to consult with a qualified military law attorney with experience with 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 Article 122a arrest and conviction 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.  It may also hinder your ability to get financial loans in the future.

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 dishonorable discharge or is convicted with an offense where the maximum punishment available is over one year of confinement.

Facing an Article 122a accusation for receiving stolen property can be frustrating, stressful, and oftentimes a distressing experience. At Military Law Center, our 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 military justice 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 122a Allegations Alone. Military Law Center Can Help.

An Article 122a 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 and getting them the rehabilitative 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