and

THE JUDGE ADVOCATES GEN

of the

ARMED FORCES

and the

GENERAL COUNSEL

of the

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREAS

PURSUANT TO THE 

UNIFORM CODE OF MILITARY JUSTI

For the Period 

January 1,1954 to December 31,19

PROPERTY OF U, S. ARMY 

THE JUDGE ADYOCATE GENERAL'S 

L IB R A R Y

ol the

SENATE AND OF THE 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

and to the

SECRETARY OF DEFENSE

m— and the

SECRETARIES OF THE DEPARTMENTS OF THE 

ARMY, NAVY, AIR FORCE, AND TREASURY

PURSUANT TO THE 

UNIFORM CODE OF MILITARY JUSTICE

For the Period

' ( - January 1 ,1954 to December 31,1954

Contents

JOINT REPORT OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF MILITARY 

AND THE JUDGE ADVOCATES GENERAL OF THE ARMED 

AND THE GENERAL COUNSEL OF THE DEPARTMENT 

TREASURY

REPORT OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF MILITARY APPEA

REPORT OF THE JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL OF THE ARMY

REPORT OF THE JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL OF THE NAVY

REPORT OF THE JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL OF THE AIR FOR

REPORT OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL OF THE DEPARTMENT 

TREASURY (UNITED STATES COAST GUARD)

Joint Report

of the

UNITED STATES COURT OF M ILITA R Y APPE

and

THE JUDGE AD VO C ATES GENERAL

OF THE AR M ED FORCES

and

THE GENERAL COUNSEL OF THE

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

January 1, 1954 to December 31,1954

United States Court of Military Appeals, The Judge Advo

eral of the Armed Forces, and the General Counsel of the D

of the Treasury to meet annually for the purposes of sur

operations of the Code and preparing a report to the Com

Armed Services of the Senate and of the House of Repre

to the Secretary of Defense, and to the Secretaries of the Dep

concerning the status of military justice, and the manner 

by which it can be improved by legislative enactments.

The three Judges of the United States Court of Military 

the three Judge Advocates General, and the General Coun

Department of the Treasury, hereafter referred to as the C

mittee, have met and conferred during the period cover

report. Because of the underlying conceptual difference

members of the Code Committee on either the substantive c

their timeliness, unanimity has not been reached on any rec

tions not previously reported to the Congress. Generally 

the principles contained in the prior recommendations are 

but, in some instances, The Judge Advocates General of th

desire to present modifications in certain of those reforms. 

tion, each military department, except the Department of 

ury, has proposed additional amendments, but they involv

areas and the individual members of the Code Committee h

gent views as to their worth or present necessity. For the r

reconciliation of the different concepts has not been att

respective military departments have proposed their in

desired recommendations in the Departmental subdivisio

report.

The problems considered by the Code Committee during t

ing period have not changed from those enumerated in t

report of this Committee, and, therefore, will not be resta

because it is desirable to have Congress give consideration to 

ous seventeen recommendations (attached hereto as Exhib

- 
appellate agencies and the United States Court of Milita

the following information is presented in recapitulated 

Total number of cases reviewed by the boards of

M a y St,

1961 to

D ec. St,

ms

Ja

19

D e

1

review 48, 406 18

Total number of cases wherein the findings were

modified by the boards of review 1,933 

Total number of cases docketed with the United

States Court of Military Appeals 4, 232 1

Total number of opinions published by the United

States Court of Military Appeals 421 

Total number of opinions published wherein the

decisions of the boards of review were modified

by the United States Court of Military Appeals. 226 

Respectfully submitted,

R obert E. Q u 

Ch

G eorge W . L 

P a u l W . B ro

C. B. M ic k e l 

Acting The Judge Advocate G

United Sta

I ra II. N u n n 

The Judge Advocate G

United Sta

R eginald C. H 

The Judge Advocate G

United States A

D avid W . K e 

General C

Department of the 

______ ____ _______ _______ 

_____________ 

__ _______ __ 

_____________ 
unnecessarily wastes the time and efforts of the officers who are 

Meet, hear the plea and impose sentence. This has been a proced

peculiar to the military system and it is not used in civilian pract

and the Federal practice in particular. If there is any benefit to 

from this procedure, it is indiscernible and so unimportant that a ch

particular is considered desirable. THEREFORE,

It is recommended that in general court martial cases, where 

with the consent of his counsel requests and the convening author

a one-officer court, whose identity must be known to the accused 

be permitted to accept a plea of guilty and adjudge a sentence in all

ital, cases. This officer should have the qualifications of a law offi

certified as competent for that p a r tic u la r duty by The Judge Advo

of the Service concerned, and have the rank of at least lieutenan

commander.

SECOND

Under the Code, there is no requirement that any member of a s

martial be a graduate of an accredited law school or a member of 

many instances, the accused would prefer to have his case heard 

court martial composed of one officer, qualified under the provision

26 (a) of the Code, rather than by the present three-officer special c

A provision permitting the accused such an election would result in 

ministration of justice, less expensive proceedings, and better utiliz

time and talents of officers now required to sit on special courts mart

FORE,

It is recommended that where the accused, with the consent of 

requests, and the convening authority approves, and where the i

one-officer court is known to the accused in advance, such officer 

to accept pleas of guilty, to conduct the trial of contested special c

cases, and to adjudge sentences. It is further recommended tha

Advocate General of the Service concerned be required to certify 

be competent to perform the duties in question.

THIRD

Under the present provisions of Article 51 (6) of the Code, th

the law officer on a motion for a finding of not guilty can be over

members of the court. This provision is not in accord with Fede

tends to make court martial procedure unnecessarily cumbersome, 

341824 55 2 

-

-

- 

-

— ------­
officer on such a question of law has a tendency to cause them 

other ruling: THEREFORE,

It is recommended that Article 51 (6) of the Code be amend

that the ruling of a law officer on a motion for a finding of not g

FOURTH

Under the present procedure, cases where the accused pleads gui

same appellate review as those cases where the accused pleads n

is felt that the review by a board of review should not be autom

accused has pleaded guilty. In that event, if he desires to raise err

which should be limited to questions of law, including legality o

should file a notice of appeal to a board of review within 5 days 

sentence is adjudged. In the absence of such notice of appeal, r

under Article 69 of the Code only. Provided, that at the time o

and his counsel are advised of his limited right of appeal. THE

It is recommended that in cases involving pleas of guilty befor

general court-martial, there be no review by a board of review of t

in such cases the accused be required within 5 days from the 

is adjudged to file a notice of appeal to a board of review. Prov

same be limited to questions of law, and that it affirmatively app

that the accused was advised of his appellate rights at the time of 

FIFTH

As enacted, Article 65 (c) of the Code provides that special 

court martial records, where a punitive discharge has not been a

be reviewed by a judge advocate of the Army or Air Force, a law 

the Navy, or a law specialist or lawyer of the Coast Guard or of th

of the Treasury. We believe it would be desirable to permit the r

records by lawyers as well as judge advocates and law specialists 

services and not be limited to the Coast Guard or the Department 

ury. It would permit a wider use of the abilities of those lawyer

ice who are not now judge advocates or law specialists, and al

use of civilian lawyers for the purpose, in commands where such 

be feasible. THEREFORE,

It is recommended that Article 65 (c) of the Code be amende

records of trials by summary and special courts-martial could b

lawyers as well as judge advocates and law specialists in each of 

-
Many vexing problems have developed with respect to the admin

accused presons who were convicted at trial but whose appellate rev

yet been completed. These individuals at the present time must 

as unsenteneed prisoners and segregated for administrative purpos

treatment, not all of it for the benefit of the man himself, is now req

additional administrative burden is excessive and costly, and could b

without detriment to the accused. Other complications in regard 

allowances are caused by this peculiar status. Because finance offic

masters are personally liable for their disbursements of public fund

to know with certainty the effective dates of pay and allowance fo

well as the precise sums involved. THEREFORE,

It is recommended that Article 71 of the Code be amended to pr

convening authority should be empowered to order all parts of a s

execution when approved by him except that portion involving dis

dishonorable or a bad-conduct discharge. This recommendation is 

to affect sentences involving death or a general or flag officer.

EIGHTH

It is a curious feature of the Code that a person under sentence o

accrue pay and allowances. If the theory is that pay and allowa

consideration given for services rendered, there can be no justificat

a situation. THEREFORE,

It is recommended that the Code be amended by providing that in 

a prisoner in confinement under sentence of death, no pay and allow

accrue to him as a matter of law after the date the convening author

such sentence, subject, of course, to his rights under Article 75 in th

sentence is disapproved or set aside.

NINTH

The distinction between custody and confinement drawn by Artic

Code has led to considerable difficulty. In the relatively short len

that the Code has been in effect, boards of review have been prese

good many cases which have required them to distinguish between th

Because some factual situations are difficult of resolution in this r

otherwise valid prosecutions have failed because the draftsman of t

tion picked the wrong alternative. There need not be any distinction 

two terms for the alleged act of the accused person is essentially 

,_^each instance. In essence he escaped from lawful authority in who
g 

proceedings. The caseloads of boards of review are increased, th

must be considered a second time, and the length of time req

pose of the case becomes greater. THEREFORE,

It is recommended that in cases covered by Article 69 of the Co

Advocate General of the appropriate service be given authority to 

rective action as boards of review now exercise under the author

them by Article 66 of the Code.

ELEVENTH

Where a case is reversed and a rehearing ordered or the charges 

by the United States Court of Military Appeals under Article 67 o

a board of review under Article 66 of the Code, the convening au

field must carry the administrative burden of disposing of the c

results in needless delay and duplication of effort. THEREFORE,

It is recommended that The Judge Advocate General of the appro

should have the authority to dispose of a case ordered dismissed 

States Court of Military Appeals or a board of review, or to dismiss a 

a rehearing has been directed by either appellate body but he fi

rehearing is not practicable.

TWELFTH

Experience has shown that the 30-day appeal period provided f

67 (c) of the Code has caused some unnecessary delays, as well 

culties in the handling of cases, and in the assignments to penal ins

has added other administrative duties without any consequent adv

accused. THEREFORE,

It is recommended that Article 67 (c) of the Code be amend

the period during which a petition for grant of review may be file

THIRTEENTH

Article 73 of the Code now provides that an accused may petiti

trial during a 1-year period which begins on the date of the convenin

approval of the sentence. It is believed desirable to amend this ar

cause it to conform to the present Federal enactment. THEREFO

It is recommended that Article 73 of the Code be amended so 

within which a petition for a new trial may be filed be extended to 

the date of imposition of sentence. This will be in accord with 

Federal practice.
Article 66 (c) and (d) of the Code, and to extend similar authoriz

Judge Advocates General in those cases acted upon by them under t

question.

FIFTEENTH

At the present time the services have difficulty in prosecuting 

volving bad checks because of the lack of any real guidepost to fo

has led in those cases to inept specifications, failure of proof, impr

tions, and divergent standards of proof required as between the seve

THEREFORE,

It is recommended that an additional punitive statute having provi

to the District of Columbia bad-check law be added to the Code 

particular needs of the Services.

SIXTEENTH

Under the present provisions of Article 15 of the Code a comma

is not permitted to impose any pay loss on an enlisted man, nor i

to sentence him to any confinement unless the offender is att

embarked upon a vessel. These provisions so restrict the auth

commanding officer that when the necessity for discipline requi

fine or a short period of confinement a trial by court martial is requ

procedure is unnecessarily expensive and cumbersome, and results 

nent and unfavorable entry in the service record of an accused. 

Government nor the accused person can be benefited by requiring f

when the issue can be settled satisfactorily by summary proceedin

In the cases of officers the present permissible punishment for 

is limited to the loss of one half of 1 month’s pay when imposed b

exercising general court martial jurisdiction. Again, these restrict

authority of a commanding officer sometimes result in trials by co

that otherwise might be disposed of administratively by the imp

non judicial punishment. A broadening of the power to permit th

of a slightly greater punishment would be a benefit both to the S

to the accused.

Under paragraph (d) of this Article, an accused has the right o

any sentence imposed to superior authority so that any real inj

be corrected. THEREFORE,

It is recommended that the Congress give consideration to inc

permissive punishments imposable under Article 15 of the Code, th

not to exceed the forfeiture of one half of 1 month’s basic pay per 

period of 2 months in the case of officers, and the loss of one half m

-

-

-

-

-

-
Present procedure provides that where a special court martial do

a punitive discharge, a summarized record of trial may be prepared 

with the regulations prescribed by the President under the terms of A

of the Code. It is believed that general court martial cases of th

referred to could be processed under the same provisions. THER

It is recommended that Article 54 of the Code be amended to in

court martial cases where the accused is acquitted, or the proceedin

terminate in his favor, or where the sentence does not extend to dea

dishonorable or bad-conduct discharge, or to confinement for 1 y

Provided, that appropriate provision be made whereby an accused 

own expense, obtain a verbatim record of such trial.

-

-
Report

of the

UNITED STATES COURT OF M ILITA R Y APPEA

January 1, 1954 to December 31, 1954

During the reporting period the Bar of the Court has 

its steady growth and there has been an increase in the civi

bership. On the last day of the period, membership of th

reached 3,132 attorneys, and broken down on a percentag

percent of the members were civilian practitioners and 5

were lawyers on duty with the Armed Forces. The thre

Army, Navy and Air Force have assisted many of their re

ponent lawyers in becoming members of the Bar of this C

accordingly, attorneys now admitted to practice before 

are residents of all 48 States, the Territory of Hawaii, G

the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. The Judges of the 

ognize the value of having both military and civilian law

ticipate in the administration of military justice and we 

the services for their efforts in affording to reserve officers 

tunity to be admitted to practice before the Court.

The Judges of the Court, in line with their previousl

policy of familiarizing the public with the importance of, an

bestowed by, the Uniform Code of Military Justice, have b

ing before and lecturing to the military service schools, Re

cers’ Associations, legal institutes, bar associations, and ci

izations. As a result of those efforts, together with the fine w

performed by the members of the Bar, the public generally is 

a better understanding of the “bill of rights” Congress enac

men and women in uniform and the civilians who accomp

overseas.

During the last reporting period the Judges of the Co

with The Judge Advocates General of the Services and Th

Counsel of the Department of the Treasury in seventeen r

dations for desired improvements in the Uniform Code o

Justice. Those recommendations are contained in the seco

report covering the period June 1, 1952 to December 31, 1

1 See Exhibit A Joint Report.

341824 55 3 

— 

— -----­
of those previously considered. The reason the Judges o

States Court of Military Appeals do not favorably rec

of the additional proposals is because of a belief that ei

for them has not been demonstrated or they turn back t

progress and destroy some of the substantial rights gra

gress to members of the Armed Forces.

The Judges of the Court believe that Congress, wh

the Code, placed upon them, at least, two fundamental 

first, to require the trial of cases within the framework 

form Code of Military Justice. The second, and the 

importance for this report, to advise Congress on the wa

by which the Uniform Code of Military Justice could 

without taking away from an accused any substantial 

has been granted to him. W e do not envisage our dutie

of the Code Committee to embrace any requirement th

the wisdom of Congress in enacting any particular pro

Code, but we are prepared, upon an appropriate occas

We, therefore, do not set out in this report our reasons fo

those members of the Code Committee who seek substa

which we believe to be unnecessarily hostile to the pur

tent of the Uniform Code. However, if Congress conc

ceed with hearings on the proposed changes, the Judges 

to, and request the privilege of, presenting their individ

The operations of the Court during the past year have 

place a substantial workload on the shoulders of the Jud

its 43 months of existence, the Court has docketed by wa

certificate, or mandatory review, a total of 6,061 cases. 

ber action has been completed in 5,946. The Court has h

ment in 572 cases, affecting 624 accused. Opinions pu

bered 598 with 40 in the process of completion. Of the 

published, 27 involved Army officers; 7 Air Force officer
P a u l W . B ro sm a n , Judg
Army 2,998 

Navy 619 

Air Force 460 

Coast Guard 15 

Total 4, 092 1

C ertificates (A rt. 6 7 (b )(2 )):

Army 62 

Navy 86 

Air Force 9 

Coast Guard 3 

T o ta l. 160 

M a n d a tory (A r t. 6 7 (b )(1 )) :

Army 17 

Navy 0 

Air Force 0 

Coast Guard 0 

Total 17 

Total cases docketed 4, 269 1, 

COURT ACTION

P etition s (A rt. 6 7 (b )(8 )):

Granted 393 

Denied.................. 3,488 1,

Dismissed 5 

Withdrawn 66 

Disposed of on motion to dismiss: 

With opinion 5 

Without opinion 16 

Disposed of by Order setting aside findings

and sentence 2 

Remanded to Board of Review 8 

Court action due (30 days) * 81 

Awaiting briefs* 43 

16,061 cases actually assigned Docket numbers. 45 cases were filed both as a Certifi

cases were submitted as Petitions twice, 1 case certified twice, and 1 Mandatory case 

•As of December 31,1953 and 1954.

16

_________________________  

____________ 

_________________________________ 

_____________________________ 

________________________________ 

____________________________________ 

____________________________________ 

_________________________________ 

_____________________________ 

_______ 

____________________________________ 

____________________________________ 

_________________________________ 

_____________________________ 

________________________ 

_____________________ 

__________________________________ 

________________________________ 

_______________________________ 

________________________ 

_____________________ 

___________________________ 

___________ 

______________ 

__________________________ 
Opinions pending* 0 0 

Remanded to Board of Review 1 0 

Set for hearing* 1 1 

Ready for hearing* 1 0 

Awaiting briefs* 0 1 

Opinions rendered:

Petitions 266 123 

Motions to dismiss 5 2 

Per curiam grants 18 3 

Certificates 110 36 

Certificates and Petitions 12 7 

Mandatory 14 7 

Motion to remand to Board of Review 1 0 

Petition for a New T ria l 0 1 

Petition for Reconsideration of Petition for 

New Trial 0 1 

Total 426 180 

Completed cases:

Petitions denied 3, 488 1,703 

Petitions dismissed 5 0 

Petitions withdrawn 66 37 

Certificates withdrawn 3 1 

Opinions rendered 421 178 

Disposed of on motion to dismiss

With opinion 5 2 

Without opinion 16 5 

Disposed of by Order setting aside findings 

and sentence 2 0 

Remanded to Board of Review 9 5 

Total 4, 015 1, 931 

* 606 cases were disposed of by 698 published opinions. 39 opinions were rendered in cas

Army officers, 7 Air Force officers, 4 Navy officers, and 1 Coast Guard officer. In addition, 

rendered in cases involving civilians. The remainder concerned enlisted personnel.

*As of December 31,1953 and 1954.

________________________ 

___________ 

__________________________ 

_______________________ 

__________________________ 

_________________________________ 

_______________________ 

________________________ 

_______________________________ 

_________________ 

_______________________________ 

____ 

_________________ 

______________________________ 

______________________________ 

__________________________ 

_______________________ 

______________________ 

____________________ 

_______________________ 

_________________________ 

_____________________ 

___________________________ 

___________ 

______________________________ 
y g 

Total............................................................... 2
Report

o f

THE JUDGE A D V O C A T E GENERAL

o f

THE A R M Y

January 1, 1954 to December 31,1954

fairly evaluate its effectiveness.

As a restatement of the law of military offenses, the C

little to be desired. The principle embodied within the Co

standard of behavior for all members of the armed services 

ing of nothing but commendation. The Court of Military 

whose members speak with the authority of judges, provid

first time in the history of our Nation, a source within th

structure which is empowered to make final and binding i

tions of the military criminal law. Thus, the Code, in s

main aspects, marks a great advance in the field of milita

Other principles embodied within the Code, mostly of an 

trative nature, give rise to serious doubts as to whether it can 

adapted to wartime conditions.

First, Appellate Review. The time consumed in proces

involving no substantial legal issues is excessive. Curren

than a year elapses, in the average case, between the date a

is tried by court-martial and the date his sentence is ordere

after review by the United States Court of Military Appeal

it is true that discipline is an intangible composed primarily 

confidence, desire to do well, belief in the cause, and the p

reward, it is also true that, for a small group, punishment o

of punishment is a most necessary ingredient of discipline. 

latter group, punishment to be effective must, among other 

certain and be prompt. It is doubtful whether a system tha

more than a year to complete appellate review in peaceti

relied upon in time of war to punish offenders promptly. 

little deterrent value in a system of military justice which 

contemporary punishment of front line deserters. Moreove

which permits wartime offenders to languish in stateside 

barracks while faithful soldiers fight and die in far off lands 

for the morale of fighting men, particularly when it is comm

edge within the military that when passions cool and peace 

341824 55 i — 
lead to complete paralysis of our military judicial syst

be anticipated if the Code were amended to permit conve

ties to order into execution sentences approved by boar

located in the field that time consumed in appellate revi

reduced by many months. Envisioned within such a pl

necessity, be means whereby cases involving legal point

which boards of review are in substantial disagreement a

to The Judge Advocate General for resolution or for ce

the Court of Military Appeals for decision.

Secondly, Non-Judicial Punishment and Inferior Co

Army, the vast bulk of offenses are petty such as mino

absences or little sins of commission. They should be dea

marily by admonitions, reprimand, restriction to limits, 

lege, extra work, or a few days of confinement and then 

if they do not become a habit. The offender should b

alleged delinquency by his officer, asked for his comme

there being no denial of the facts, should be awarded his 

without further to-dos. Certainly there should be no r

form of court-martial with its attending smear on the yo

record. For many years petty offenses were disposed of i

istic fashion both in the Army and in the Navy with prof

ices and to the offenders. The Code, with its heavy a

malities and its restrictions on commanders, has done mu

this highly desirable and effective method of maintainin

Under its present provisions, there is very little that a 

officer may do, short of court-martial, to impress upon 

command who are hesitant to accept the rules and re

tendant to a military life that such rules and regulatio

questioned only at their peril. As a result, instead of b

give parental guidance to first offenders, he must eithe

before courts-martial, impose one of the inadequate 

presently provided under Article 15, or ignore the matter 

— 
or embarked on vessels. After three years experience unde

it has been demonstrated that commanding officers ashore n

authority. Accordingly, it is recommended that subdivisio

(E) and (F) of Article 15 be amended to permit command

to impose the punishments prescribed therein upon enlisted 

of their command without regard to their duty station.

Next in the scale above petty offenses are episodes which 

life would lead to the police court; such as, public drunkenn

offenses, disorder, destruction of property, and military 

more than minor but considerably less than major importa

Army’s police court is the summary court-martial. Unde

visions of the Articles of War in effect prior to the enactm

present Code, a summary court-martial had the power t

person subject to military law, except officers, warrant 

cadets for any crime or offense not capital made punishab

articles. Noncommissioned officers could not, if they object

be brought to trial before a summary court-martial. 

present Code, no person may be brought to trial before a 

court-martial if he objects thereto, unless his commanding 

first offered him nonjudicial punishment under Article 15. 

instances the punishments provided under Article 15 are 

inadequate as a means of punishing those who have committ

of a nature warranting a summary court-martial. Conseque

is no recourse but to try the offender by special court-

proceeding that requires at least five officers and a great dea

work and considerable delay and where in many instan

result in no graver punishment than could have been adju

summary court-martial.

Accordingly, it is recommended that the limitation on the 

of a summary court-martial added by the present Code be e

Thirdly, The Law Officer and Pretrial Investigations. I 

The Judge Advocate General of the Navy in urging the ret

law officer to the court as a voting member of the court and 
quence, has resulted in the unnecessary expenditure o

effort.

2. Operations:

a. During the calendar year of 1954, The Judge Advo

School at Charlottesville, Virginia, provided residential 

for 800 military lawyers. The School conducted four c

three-month course in basic military law, graduating 2

One advance course of 31 weeks was held for 23 selecte

The Judge Advocate General’s Corps. Lawyers special

field of procurement law attended 6 two-week courses wh

generally the latest developments in that field. During t

to 24 September 1954, a conference of Judge Advocates 

general court-martial jurisdictions throughout the wor

held at The Judge Advocate General’s School.

The nonresident training activities of the School provi

tion for over 2,300 reserve officers. The School published 

uted instructional guides and material for the 101 Judg

USAR school courses being conducted in 83 USAR s

Advocate branch departments with a total enrollment o

The School conducted continuous research and plannin

of military law. It assisted in the preparation, publicat

tribution of the 1954 edition of the military justice handb

“The Law Officer”, which is designed to aid law officers an

of special courts-martial in conducting military trials. 

pared and published a revised edition of a special text boo

a military justice handbook entitled “Uniform System o

the 1954 cumulative pocket part to the Manual for Cou

and the weekly letter of The Judge Advocate General whic

recent developments in military law of immediate im

judge advocates in the field.

The School prepared and completed for distribution 

military justice films entitled “The Investigating Officer”
c. In undertaking to solve the problem of court repor

Army, electronic recorder reproducer sets equipped with 

devices for recording proceedings were procured and iss

judge advocates of commands exercising general court-ma

diction. A career field for enlisted court reporters was 

and a course for court reporters is planned to begin at 

Advocate General’s School in early 1955.

d. The commissioning of 200 officers in The Judge Adv

eral’s Corps during the fiscal year 1955 has been author

majority of those commissioned under this program have b

officers recently graduated from law school without previo

training. To prepare them properly for their duties as 

vocates, they are given an eight week course of training 

fantry School followed by a three-month course in basic m

at The Judge Advocate General’s School.

e. Pursuant to the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Ar

The Judge Advocate General and senior members of h

supervision of the administration of military justice in

Army headquarters and principal posts located within the 

United States. Also inspected were all commands in Alas

Korea, and Hawaii in which general court-martial juri

being exercised over Army personnel.

3. Statistics:

a. The number of records of trial received in the 

Judge Advocate General for review pursuant to Article 

the period covered by this report follows:

Total 

•This figure Includes cases that required review under A rticle 69 and ac

o f review.

- 

________________________________________________________
SI 

On hand at beginning of period_______________________________ 

Referred for review__________________________________________ 

Reviewed____________________________________________________ 7

Pending at close of period____________________________________ 

c. From 1 January 1954 to 31 December 1954, 47.7 pe

accused whose cases were received in the Office of The Jud

General for review pursuant to Article 66 requested repre

appellate defense counsel before boards of review.

d. Based upon the number of cases reviewed by boar

during this period, 12.8 percent were forwarded to the U

Court of Military Appeals pursuant to the three subdiv

Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 67 (b).

E ugene M. C a f fe y 

Major General, US

The Judge Advocat

31 December 195^
Report

o f

THE JUDGE A D V O C A T E GENERAL

o f

THE N A V Y

January 1, 1954 to December 31,1954

conditions of full mobilization there would result a br

military criminal process which would leave the servic

really effective formal machinery for the maintenance o

and good order among their members.

This development, should it occur, would jeopardize th

military missions.

Further, an observation of the operation of the Code 

recent past has shown that many of our men receive courts 

offenses which could have been punished by commanding of

the Code came into effect. Thus the service records of m

men are becoming fouled by entries of conviction by cour

cases where a lesser punishment by commanding officer

appropriate if these officers were empowered to impose 

punishment.

The situation should be altered if such can be done wi

harm to discipline within the services.

The situation has come about by reason of a reduction i

of the commanding officer to administer punishment. Th

the commanding officer in this regard is now so slight and s

that he must make more frequent use of the court-martial

Proposals designed to reduce unnecessary burdens im

the Services by the Uniform Code and to increase the powe

who exercise command are embodied in the attached dra

to amend the Code. A sectional analysis of the bill acco

draft. Both the draft and the analysis are made a part of 

In April of 1954 the Judge Advocate General called a co

legal officers at the School of Naval Justice, Newport, Rh

This three day conference was attended by district and 

officers from the principal naval commands throughout 

These officers, who are concerned with the daily admin

military justice, discussed mutual problems and submitte

tive recommendations to the Judge Advocate General.
officers was attended by 27 officers, and a short course of 

instruction was given to 111 senior officers attending the N

College at Newport.

b. Eleven motion picture training films on the subject o

justice were being distributed throughout the Naval establ

the beginning of 1954. During the year this number was 

by a series of four films entitled “Navy Evidence in Court

and a film entitled “Easy Out,” depicting the consequences 

tive discharge.

c. Correspondence courses on military justice were used e

during 1954. A single-assignment course on the provisi

Code was completed by 9,825 officers and enlisted men durin

There are 2,239 persons currently enrolled in this cours

average of 925 applications for the course are being receive

A comprehensive 12-assignment course on Military Justic

pleted by 2,805 officers and enlisted men during 1954. 7,2

are currently enrolled in the course, and an average of 1,00

tions for the course are being received monthly. Interest in 

prehensive course has been stimulated by the announcemen

motion examinations including military justice as an ex

subject will be inaugurated in 1955.

During 1954,7,196 records of trial were received in the O

Judge Advocate General for review pursuant to Article 66

number, 2,671 were general courts martial and 4,525 we

courts-martial. In addition, 488 records of trial were rece

Office of the Judge Advocate General for examination p

Article 69.

The following table shows the workload of the boards of r

ing 1954:

On hand January 1,1954 

Referred for review 7

Review ed

Pending December 31, 1954.

7

-

_________________________________________ 

_____________________________________________ 

_________________ 
I ra H . N u n n ,

Rear Admiral, U

Judge Advocate 

of the Navy.
(15) Convening authority shall be construed to refer to the 

convened the court, an officer commanding for the time being, a 

command, or any officer exercising general court martial jurisdicti

(b) Article 2 (4) is amended to read as follows:

“ (4) Retired personnel of a regular component of the armed fo

entitled to receive pay or personnel of a reserve component of the a

who are entitled to receive retired pay, retirement pay, or disabilit

pay.”

(c) Article 12 is amended to read as follow s:

“ART. 12. Confinement with enemy prisoners prohibited.

“No member of the armed forces of the United States shall 

confinement in immediate association with enemy prisoners or o

nationals not members of the armed forces of the United States, e

member of the armed forces of the United States may be confined in U

confinement facilities with members of the armed forces of frien

nations.”

(d) Article 14 is amended by deleting subdivision (b) thereof.

(e) Article 15 is amended to read as follow s:

“ART. 15. Non judicial punishment.

“ (a) Under such regulations as the President may prescribe

following disciplinary punishments may be imposed for minor offen

tion to or in lieu of admonition or reprimand without the interventio

martial

(1) upon an officer or warrant officer of his command:

A. by an officer in command exercising general court m

diction :

1. forfeiture of not to exceed one half of his pay per 

period not exceeding three months;

B. by any officer in command:

1. withholding of privileges for a period not to exceed t

tive weeks; or

2. restriction to certain specified limits, with or withou

from duty, for a period not to exceed two consecutive weeks;

(2) upon any other military person of his command:

A. by any officer in command exercising spec

diction :

1. confinement for a period not to exceed ten consecut

2. confinement on bread and water or diminished rations 

not to exceed five consecutive days; or

-

-

— 

- 

-
punishment authorized, the categories of officers in command author

cise such powers, and the applicability of this article to an accused w

trial by court-martial.

“ (c) An officer in charge may, for minor offenses, impose on 

sons assigned to the unit of which he is in charge, such of the punishm

ized to be imposed by officers in command as the Secretary of the Dep

by regulation specifically prescribe, as provided in subdivisions (a) 

‘‘(d) Any person punished under authority of this article wh

punishment unjust or disproportionate to the offense may, throug

channel, appeal to the next superior authority. The appeal shall b

and shall be made within fifteen days from the date the punishmen

The appeal shall be promptly forwarded and decided, but the person p

in the meantime be required to undergo the punishment adjudged. 

who imposes the punishment, his successor in command, and super

shall have power to suspend, set aside, or remit any part or amount o

ment and to restore all rights, privileges and property affected.

“ (e) The imposition of disciplinary punishment under auth

article for any act or omission shall not be a bar to trial by court m

serious crime or offense growing out of the same act or omission a

erly punishable under this article; but the fact that a disciplinary 

has been enforced may be shown by the accused upon trial, and wh

shall be considered in determining the measure of punishment to be 

the event of a finding of guilty.”

( f ) Article 16 is amended to read as follow s:

“ART. 16. Courts-martial classified.

“ (a) There shall be three kinds of courts martial in each o

forces, namely:

(1) General courts martial;

(2) Special courts martial; and

(3) Summary courts martial

“ (b) A general court martial shall consist of any number 

not less than five, including a law officer, except that a general c

shall consist only of a law officer if, prior to the convening of th

accused has so requested in writing, and the convening authority h

thereto.

“ (c) A special court martial shall consist of any number of 

less than three, except that a special court martial shall consist 

officer if, prior to the convening of the court, the accused has so 

writing, and the convening authority has consented thereto.

“ (d) A summary court martial shall consist of one officer.”

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-
this code, and under such regulations as the President may prescrib

offenses. Special courts martial may, under such limitations as t

may prescribe, adjudge any punishment not forbidden by this code e

dishonorable discharge, dismissal, confinement in excess of 6 months

on bread and water or diminished rations in excess of 30 days, soli

ment in excess of 30 days, hard labor without confinement in excess 

forfeiture of pay exceeding two thirds pay per month, or forfeitur

a period exceeding 6 months.

(j) Article 20 is amended to read as follows:

“ART. 20. Jurisdiction of summary courts-martial.

“ Subject to article 17, summary courts martial shall have jurisd

persons subject to this code except officers, warrant officers, cad

cadets, and midshipmen for any noncapital offense made punishable 

No person with respect to whom summary courts martial have juris

be brought to trial before a summary court martial if he objects th

under the provisions of article 15 he has been permitted and has elec

punishment under such article. Where objection to trial by sum

martial is made by an accused who has not been permitted to refuse 

■under article 15, trial shall be ordered by special or general cour

may be appropriate. Summary courts martial may adjudge any 

not forbidden by this code except death, dismissal, dishonorable or 

discharge, confinement in excess of one month, confinement on brea

or diminished rations in excess of 20 days, solitary confinement in 

days, hard labor without confinement in excess of 45 days, restricti

specified limits in excess of 2 months, or forfeiture of pay in excess 

of one month’s pay.”

(k) Article 22 (a) (4) is amended to read as follows:

“ (4) any flag or general officer, or his successor, in comm

or activity of the Navy or Marine Corps

(1) Article 23 (a) (5) is amended to read as follows:

“ (5) any officer in command of a unit or activity of the N

Guard; the commanding officer of any Marine brigade, regiment, 

talion, or corresponding unit; the commanding officer of any Mar

wing, group, separate squadron, station, base, auxiliary airfield, o

where members of the Marine Corps are on duty;”

(m) Articles 22 (b) and 23 (b) are amended to read as follow

“ (b) When any such officer is an accuser, the court shall b

a competent authority not subordinate in command to the accuser

any case be convened by a superior competent authority when dee

by him.”

-

-

-

-

-

-
a State; and

(3) certified to be qualified for such duty by The Jud

General of the armed force of which he is a member.

“ (b) A law officer appointed as a general court martial shal

to having the qualifications specified in (a) above, be (1) specific

to be qualified for such duty by the Judge Advocate General of the 

of which he is a member, and (2) serving in a grade above captain 

of the Army, Air Force, or Marine Corps, and in a grade above li

member of the Navy or Coast Guard.”

“ (c) No person shall be eligible to act as law officer in a c

is the accuser or a witness for the prosecution or has acted as 

officer or as counsel in the same case.”

(q) Article 27 (a) is amended' to read as follow s:

“ (a) For each general and special court martial the author

the court shall appoint a trial counsel and a defense counsel, togeth

assistants as he deems necessary or appropriate. No person who 

investigating officer, law officer or court member in any case sha

pressly requested by the accused, act as defense counsel or assis

counsel in the same case. No person who has acted for the prosecu

subsequently in the same case for the defense, nor shall any per

acted for the defense act subsequently in the same case for the pro

(r) Article 29 (b) is amended to read as follow s:

“ (b) Whenever a general court martial is reduced’ below f

tl^e trial shall not proceed unless the convening authority appoin

bers sufficient in number to provide not less than five members. 

new members have been sworn, the trial may proceed after the re

mony of each witness previously examined has been read to the 

presence of the accused and counsel.”

(s) Article 29 is amended by redesignating subdivision (c) th

division (d) and inserting a new subdivision (c) to read as follow

“ (c) No general court martial shall proceed with the trial 

the absence of the law officer regularly detailed. The law officer, i

his duties as a member, shall perform the duties prescribed in artic

(t) Article 31 is amended to read as follow s:

“ART. 31. Compulsory self incrimination prohibited.

“ (a) No person subject to this code shall compel any perso

nate himself or to answer any question the answer to which 

incriminate him.”

“ (b) No person subject to this code who occupies an official 

a military law enforcement or military crime detection agency, or w

-

-

-

-

-
() y p

or through the use of coercion, unlawful influence, or unlawful indu

be received in evidence against him in a trial by court martial.”

(u) Article 32 (a) is amended to read as follows:

“ (a) No charge or specification shall be referred to a ge

martial for trial until an investigation of all the matters set forth 

been made. This investigation shall include inquiries as to the 

matter set forth in the charges, form of charges, and the dispo

should be made of the case in the interest of justice and discipline.”

(v) Article 32 is amended by inserting at the end thereof the foll

“ (e) For offenses in violation of articles 8a through 92 the a

after consultation with counsel, waive the investigation required by 

(w ) The first sentence of article 37 is amended to read as follows

“No authority convening a general, special, or summary court 

other commanding officer, nor any officer serving on the staffs th

censure, reprimand, or admonish such court or any member, law 

counsel thereof, with respect to the findings or sentence adjudged b

or with respect to any other exercise of its or his functions in the co

proceedings.”

(x) Article 39 is amended to read as follow s:

“ART. 39. Sessions.

“Whenever a general or special court martial is to deliberate o

the members of the court shall be present. All other proceedings, in

consultations of the court with counsel, shall be made a part of th

be in the presence of the accused, the defense counsel, and the trial 

(y) Article 41 (a) is amended by deleting the words “and the 

of a general court martial.”

(z) Article 41 (b) is amended to read as follows:

“ (b) In a general court martial, each accused and trial coun

entitled to one peremptory challenge, but the law officer shall not b

except for cause.”

(aa) Article 42 (a) is amended to read as follows :

“ (a) All interpreters and, in general and special courts-marti

bers, and the reporter shall take an oath or affirmation to perform 

faithfully.”

(bb) Article 43 (b) is amended to read as follow s:

“ (b) Except as otherwise provided in this article, a person c

desertion or absence without leave in time of peace or any of 

punishable under articles 119 through 132 inclusive shall not be 

tried by court martial if the offense was committed more than 

-

-

-

-

-
shall determine all questions of law and fact arising during a trial 

and shall, in the event of conviction of the accused, adjudge an 

sentence.”

(ee) The second sentence of article 51 (b) is amended to read as 

“Any such ruling made by the law officer of a general court mar

interlocutory question other than the question of the accused’s sa

final and shall constitute the ruling of the court, but the law office

any such ruling at any time during the trial.”

(£f) Article 51 (c) is amended by deleting the words “instruct th

the elements of the offense and.”

(gg) Article 52 (a) (2) is amended to read as follows:

“ (2) No person shall be convicted of any other offense to 

pleaded not guilty, except by the concurrence of two thirds of 

present at the time the vote is taken. When a plea of guilty to su

has been accepted by the court, a finding of guilty as to such of

entered in the record without voting thereon.”

(hh) Article 52 is amended by inserting at the end thereof the f

“ (d) This article shall not apply to a general or special 

consisting of only one officer.”

(ii) Article 54 is amended to read as follows:

“ART. 54. Record of trial.

“ (a) Each court martial shall keep a separate record of th

of the trial of each case brought before it. A record of trial by a 

in which the sentence adjudged requires review by a board of 

article 66 shall contain a complete verbatim account of the pro

testimony before the court, and shall be authenticated in such m

be required by regulations which the President may prescribe. All 

of trial shall contain such matter and be authenticated in such m

be required by regulations which the President may prescribe.”

“ (b) A copy of the record of the proceedings of each gener

•court-martial shall be given to the accused as soon as authenticated

(jj) Article 57 is amended to read as follow s:

“ART. 57. Effective date of sentence.

“ (a) Any period of confinement included in a sentence of a 

shall begin to run from the date the sentence is adjudged by the 

but periods during which the sentence to confinement is suspen

excluded in computing the service of the term of confinement.”

“ (b) All other portions of a sentence of a court martial sha

regulations as the President may prescribe, become effctive on the 

executed in accordance with article 71.”

-

-

-

-

-
(11) Article 65 (b) is amended by deleting the words “to be 

board of review” wherever appearing therein.

(mm) Article 65 (c) is amended to read as follows:

“ (c) All other special and summary court martial records s

warded to the officer exercising general court martial jurisdictio

command, or such other authority as may be designated by the Secr

Department, for review by a judge advocate of the Army or Air F

specialist or lawyer of the Navy, or a law specialist or lawyer o

Guard or Treasury Department In addition to returning such re

convening authority with a direction that certain action be taken

exercising general court martial jurisdiction, or the authority de

the Secretary of the Department, may take the same action with 

such records as is authorized for the convening authority. Such r

be transmitted and disposed of as the Secretary of the Department m

by regulations.”

(nn) Article 66 (a) is amended to read as follow s:

“ (a) The Judge Advocate General of each of the armed force

stitute in his office one or more boards of review, each composed of n

three officers, except that for the Coast Guard any member of a boar

may be a civilian officer. Each member of a board of review must 

least six years of experience in legal duties in any department or 

and must be a member of the bar of a Federal court or the highes

state.”

(oo) Article 66 (b) is amended to read as follows:

“ (b) The Judge Advocate General shall refer to a board of 

record in every case of trial by court martial in which the sentence, a

affects a general or flag officer, or extends to death, or to the dismiss

cer, cadet, or midshipman. He shall also refer to a board of review 

in every case of trial by court martial in which the sentence, as appro

to dishonorable or bad conduct discharge, or to confinement for one y

unless such dishonorable or bad-conduct discharge, or confinement f

or more, was adjudged in a case where the accused pleaded guilty to 

of which he was found guilty.”

(pp) Article 66 (c) is amended to read as follows:

“ (c) In a case referred to it, the board of review shall act o

spect to the findings and sentence as approved by the convening au

shall affirm only such findings of guilty as it finds correct in law a

determines on the basis of the entire record should be affirmed. It 

the sentence or such part or amount of the sentence as it finds correct 

considering the record, it shall have authority to weigh the evidenc

- 

-

-

-

-

-
the accused and on good cause shown, the Court of Military Appeals 

a review; but the court must consider a petition for a grant of re

(A ) counsel who represented the accused at his trial or before the 

view, (B ) appellate defense counsel appointed by The Judge Advoca

the accused was not represented by counsel before the board of re

civilian counsel detained by the accused, certifies that in his opinion 

law relied upon materially prejudiced the substantial rights of the 

(ss) Article 67 (c) is amended to read as follows:

“ (c) The accused shall have ten days from the time he is n

decision of a board of review to petition the Court of Military Appea

of review, but such petition shall not deprive the board of review o

ever his case until the petition or other document is received in the C

tary Appeals. The court shall act upon such a p e titio n within thirt

receipt thereof.”

(tt) Article 67 (f) is amended to read as follows:

“ (f) After it has acted on a case, the Court of Military Appea

The Judge Advocate General to return the record to the board of re

ther review in accordance with the decision of the court. The Ju

General may dismiss the charges whenever the Court of Military 

ordered them dismissed or whenever the court has ordered a rehe

finds a rehearing impracticable. Otherwise, The Judge Advocate G

tinless there is to be further action by the President or the Sec

Department, instruct the convening authority to take action in acc

the decision of the court. If the court has ordered a rehearing an

ing authority finds a rehearing impracticable, he may dismiss the 

(uu) Article 69 is amended to read as follows:

“ART. 69. Review in the Office of The Judge Advocate Genera

“Every record of trial by court-martial, in which there has bee

guilty and a sentence, the appellate review of which is not otherw

for by articles 65 and 66, shall be examined in the office of the Ju

General. The Judge Advocate General may refer any such record 

review for review in accordance with article 66. If any part of th

sentence is found unsupported in law, The Judge Advocate Genera

refer the record to a board of review for review in accordance with 

take such action in the case as is authorized for a board of review u

66 (c) and (d). If the record is reviewed by a board of review, the

further review by the Court of Military Appeals except pursuant 

sions of article 67 (b) (2). The Judge Advocate General is no

affirm a finding of guilty or a sentence found correct in law and fac
officer), cadet, or midshipman shall be ordered executed until app

Secretary of the Department, or such Under Secretary or Assistant 

may be designated by him. He shall approve the sentence or such p

or commuted form of the sentence as he sees fit, and may suspend the 

any part of the sentence as approved by him. In time of war 

emergency he may commute a sentence of dismissal to reduction to 

grade. A person who is so reduced may be required to serve for the 

the war or emergency and six months thereafter.”

“ (c) Except as provided in (d) and (e) below, no sentenc

of a sentence extending to dishonorable or bad-conduct discharge sha

executed until approved by The Judge Advocate General or affirmed b

review, as the case may be, and, in cases reviewed by it, the Court 

Appeals.”

“ (d) All court martial sentences and portions of sentences n

dismissal or dishonorable or bad-conduct discharge may be order

by the convening authority when approved by him. The convenin

may suspend the execution of any sentence, except a death sentence

“ (e) Under such regulations as the Secretary of the Depa

prescribe, the officer exercising general court martial jurisdiction 

cused may, at any time after he approves a sentence extending to di

dishonorable or bad-conduct discharge, and upon the specific reques

cused, order the dismissal or discharge executed if the accused is 

parole or the sentence to confinement has been executed. If the se

sustained upon appellate review, or in any subsequent proceedings, 

be taken in accordance with article 75.”

(ww) Article 72 (a) is amended to read as follows:

“ (a) Prior to the vacation of the suspension of a special c

sentence which as approved includes a bad-conduct discharge, or 

court martial sentence which as approved includes a bad-conduct 

exceeds a sentence that could have been adjudged by a special court

officer having special court martial jurisdiction over the probation

ficer designated by him if authorized by regulations prescribed by t

concerned, shall hold a hearing on the alleged violation of probati

hearing the probationer shall be represented by counsel if he so 

hearing shall be required if the probationer is serving a sentence to 

imposed by a civil court, in a civilian confinement facility.”

(xx) Article 73 is amended to read as follow s:

“ART. 73. Petition for a new trial.

“ At any time within 2 years after approval by the convenin

of a court martial sentence which extends to death, dismissal, 

-

- 

-

- 

-
(a) Except as provided in (d) below, and under such re

the President may prescribe, all rights, privileges, and property 

an executed portion of a court martial sentence which has been 

disapproved, except an executed dismissal or discharge, shall be res

a new trial or rehearing is ordered and such executed portion is 

a sentence imposed upon the new trial or rehearing.”

(zz) Article 75 is amended by inserting at the end thereof the f

“ (d) Where a sentence of dismissal or of dishonorable or 

discharge which has been executed tinder article 71 (e) is not su

appellate review, the Secretary of the Department shall, except as 

provided, substitute therefor a form of discharge authorized for ad

issuance. An officer dismissed by such a sentence may be reappo

President alone to such commissioned rank and precedence as in 

of the President such former officer would have attained had he 

missed. The reappointment of such a former officer shall be wi

to position vacancy and shall affect the promotion status of other 

insofar as the President may direct. A person discharged by suc

may be authorized by the Secretary of the Department to serve 

mainder of his enlistment. A person reappointed or restored t

his dismissal or discharge has been executed under article 71 (e) 

considered a member of the military service for any purpose during 

between his dismissal or discharge and his reappointment or rest

(aaa) Article 95 is amended to read as follow s:

“ART. 95. Arrest and physical restraint.

“Any person subject to this code who resists apprehension or 

or who escapes from physical restraint lawfully imposed shall 

as a court martial may direct.”

(bbb) The following is inserted as article 123a:

“ART. 123a. Making, drawing, or uttering check, draft, or o

sufficient funds.

“Any person subject to this code who

(1) for the procurement of any article or thing of value, o

(2) for the payment of any past-due debt or other obligat

(3) for any purpose with intent to defraud, makes, d

or delivers any check, draft, or order for the payment of mon

bank or other depository, knowing at the time that the maker or 

not or will not have sufficient funds in or credit with the bank 

pository for the payment of that check, draft, or order in ful

ment, shall be punished as a court martial may direct. The mak

uttering, or delivering by a maker or drawer of a check, draft, o

-

-

— 

-

of the United States may be confined in United States confinement fa

members of the armed forces of friendly foreign nations.

Paragraph (at) repeals subsection (b) of article 14. The propo

ment to article 57 (paragraph (jj) below) provides that the Preside

scribe periods during which a sentence to confinement may be interr

ing the provision in article 14 (b) unnecessary.

Paragraph ( e ) amends article 15 as follows: eliminates the term “

officer” and in lieu thereof uses the term “officer in commandprovid

officer exercising general court martial jurisdiction may impose a f

one half pay per month for three months upon officers, the officer ex

cial court martial jurisdiction may impose confinement for ten days, 

on bread and water for five days, forfeiture of one half of one mon

reduction in grade upon enlisted persons; and provides that appea

judicial punishment must be made within fifteen days from the date 

ment is imposed.

Paragraph (/) amends article 16 to provide that a general court m

consist of five or more members including a law officer, or of a law of

prior to the convening of such court, the accused requests in writin

tried before a law officer only and the convening authority conse

Further, a special court-martial shall consist of three or more mem

single officer only if, prior to the convening of such court, the accused 

in writing and the convening authority consents thereto.

Paragraph (g) amends article 17 (b) to provide that review su

that by the officer who convened the court shall be carried out by 

force of which the accused is a member.

Paragraph ( h) amends article 18 to provide that the death pena

be adjudged by a general court martial consisting of a law officer.

Paragraph (i) amends article 19 to provide that special courts-

adjudge confinement on bread and water for thirty days and solitary 

for thirty days. Further, the provision that a bad-conduct dischar

be adjudged unless a complete record of the proceedings and testi

the court has been made is eliminated.

Paragraph (j) amends article 20 to provide that a summary c

may adjudge confinement on bread and water for twenty days and 

finement for twenty days. Further, the provision that the Preside

scribe limitations on these punishments is eliminated.

-

-

-

-

-

-
gp() p() , 

persons as members of courts-martial.

Paragraph (o) amends article 25 (a) to provide that an officer 

special court martial shall have the qualifications specified for a l

article 26 (a).

Paragraph (p) amends article 26 to provide that a law officer act

eral court-martial shall, in addition to the qualifications specified t

officer serving in the grade of major or lieutenant commander or h

specifically certified for such duty by The Judge Advocate General

graph also makes the necessary changes in language to refer to the la

member of the court to conform with the amendment to article 16, su

Paragraph (q) amends article 27 (a) by deleting the languag

qualifies an investigating officer, law officer, or court member from 

sequently in the same case as trial counsel or assistant trial couns

Paragraph (r) amends article 29 (b) by deleting the word “law 

the last sentence thereof.

Paragraph (s) amends article 29 by inserting a new subsectio

provides that a general court martial shall not proceed in the ab

member who is the law officer of the court and provides that the l

addition to his duties as a member, shall perform the duties p

article 51.

Paragraph (t) amends article 31 using as a guide the limitatio

by Judge Latimer in his dissenting opinion in United States v. Wils

(No. 647), 8 CMR 48.

Paragraphs (« ) and (v ) amend article 32 by deleting the wor

and impartial” from subsection (a) thereof and by inserting a new s

providing for a waiver of the pre trial investigation for offenses in 

articles 85 through 92 (desertion to disobedience of orders).

Paragraph (w ) extends the provisions of article 37 to Include 

serving convening authorities and commanding officers.

Paragraph (x ) amends article 39 by deleting therefrom referenc

officer who will, under the amended article 16, be a member of the c

sit with the court in its closed sessions.

Paragraph, (y ) amends article 41 (a) by deleting the words “ 

officer of a general court martial” because, under amended article 

officer will be a member of the court.

-

-

-

-
Paragraph (dd) amends article 51 to provide that the office

general or special court martial shall determine all questions of 

arising in the course of the trial, and adjudge an appropriate s

event of conviction.

Paragraph ( ee) amends article 51 (b) to provide that the la

rule with finality on a motion for a finding of not guilty.

Paragraph tff) amends article 51 (c) by eliminating the req

the law officer instruct the court on the elements of the offense.

Paragraph (gg) amends article 52 (a) (2) to provide that if a 

has been accepted by the court, a finding of guilty as to the o

entered in the record without a vote thereon.

Paragraph (hh) amends article 52 to make the provisions there

to courts martial consisting of one officer only.

Paragraph (ii) amends article 54 to provide that there shall 

record of trial in each case where the sentence adjudged requires 

case by a board of review, and that such records shall be au

accordance with regulations prescribed by the President.

Paragraph (j j) amends article 57 by deleting from subsection (

provision concerning forfeiture of pay in order to permit conveni

to execute all portions of a sentence except those requiring depart

Further, the President is authorized to prescribe periods during wh

to confinement may be interrupted, such periods to be excluded 

the service of the term of confinement.

Paragraphs (Jck) and (uu) amend articles 65 (a) and 69 to pr

record of trial of a general court martial which adjudged a sentence 

to a bad conduct discharge, or not exceeding the sentence that co

adjudged by a special court-martial, shall be transmitted and disp

Secretary of the Department may prescribe by regulations. Furt

is amended to provide that the Judge Advocate General in his d

refer any case reviewed by him to a board of review as now prov

69, or he himself may have the power and may take such action 

a board of review can take under articles 66 (c) and (d). He ne

finding of guilty or a sentence found correct in law and fact.

Paragraph (11) and (oo) amend articles 65 (b) and 66 (b) t

cases involving a dishonorable or bad conduct discharge or co

one year or more where the accused has pleaded guilty to each of

-

-

-

-

-
must have had at least six years of experience in legal duties in any 

or armed force.

Paragraph (pp) amends article 66 (c) to repeal the provision wh

the boards of review to consider the appropriateness of sentences.

Paragraph (qq) amends article 66 (e) to authorize the Judge Advo

to dismiss the charges when the board of review so directs or when h

the rehearing ordered by the board of review is impracticable.

Paragraph (rr) amends article 67 (b) (3) to provide that the C

tary Appeals must consider petitions for grant of review only w

who represented the accused at trial or before the board of revie

late defense counsel appointed by the Judge Advocate General if the 

not represented by counsel before the board, or civilian counsel reta

accused certifies that in his opinion the errors of law relied upon 

prejudiced the substantial rights of the accused.

Paragraph (ss) amends article 67 (c) to provide that an accuse

ten days, from the time he is notified of the decision of the board o

petition the Court of Military Appeals for a grant of review. T

review shall not be deprived of jurisdiction over his case until the 

other document is received in the Court of Military Appeals.

Paragraph (tt) amends article 67 (f) to authorize the Judge Ad

eral to dismiss the charges when the Court of Military Appeals s

when he finds that the rehearing ordered by the Court of Military 

impracticable.

Paragraph (vv) amends article 71 to provide that all portions of a 

a court martial may be ordered executed by the convening authori

proved by him, except that portion of a sentence involving dismissal, 

or bad conduct discharge. No sentence involving death or a gen

officer may be ordered into execution until finally approved in accorda

code. Further, no pay or allowances shall accrue to a prisoner af

the convening authority approves a sentence of death. After his a

sentence which includes a dishonorable or bad-conduct discharge or 

the officer exercising general court martial jurisdiction may, upon 

request of the accused, order the discharge or dismissal executed if 

is eligible for parole or there remains no unexecuted sentence of con

Paragraph (ww) amends article 72 (a) to provide that a hearing 

proceedings is unnecessary where the accused is serving a sentence of 

imposed by a civil court, or where the sentence of a general court

approved, does not extend to a bad conduct discharge, or does not 

- 

-

-

-
p

Paragraphs (yy) and (zz) amend article 75 to provide that whe

which includes a dishonorable or bad-conduct discharge or a dismis

been executed upon the specific request of the accused is not su

appellate review, the Secretary of the Department shall, unless th

reappointed or restored to duty, substitute therefor a form of disc

ized for administrative issuance. The President may reappoint a

missed by such sentence to such commissioned rank and precede

opinion of the President such former officer would have attained 

been dismissed. The appointment of such former officer shall be w

to position vacancy and shall affect the promotion status of other 

insofar as the President may direct. A person discharged by s

may be permitted to serve out the remainder of his enlistment. 

person reappointed or restored to duty after his dismissal or disch

executed upon his request shall be a member of the military se

purpose during the interval between his dismissal or discharge a

ment or restoration.

Paragraph (aaa) amends article 95 to remove all distinctions 

finement and custody.

Paragraph (bbb) inserts an additional punitive article simila

check statutes of the District of Columbia (title 22, D. C. Code, s

the State of Missouri (Revised Statutes of Missouri 561.460, 561.

Report

o f

THE JUDGE A D V O C A TE GENERAL

o f

THE AIR FORCE

January 1,1954 to December 31/1954

1949 Manual, and the present Uniform Code of Military 

implemented by the 1951 Manual. Experience as indica

far as the Air Force is concerned, military justice was a

more efficiently under the Elston Act than under the laws 

ceded it and the Uniform Code which replaced it. The 

time in handling courts-martial cases is 40% more in the pre

and the cost to the Government of final appellate review 

Uniform Code is many times the cost under the Elston 

rights of the individual were given at least equal protectio

Elston Act as is now provided by the Uniform Code. M

the event of a global war, the present excessive costs in bo

money would be multiplied many times and a very appre

of such increase would be caused by the necessity of t

court-martial records from the various theaters of o

Washington every time the accused desires to petition 

States Court of Military Appeals for a grant of review un

67 (b) (3).

b. It thus appears that it might be in order to recomm

of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and the reenact

Elston Act with the necessary modifications to make it a

all the armed services and to provide a method whereby 

may resolve their differences on questions of law, shoul

differences arise. However, on the other hand, such a re

tion might be considered premature since the Uniform Co

been in operation about three and one-half years. Ther

recommended that the Uniform Code, with some vital an

amendments which will be discussed hereinafter, be afford

year of operation so that its effectiveness and workability, a

may be studied and evaluated with a view toward devisin

of military justice which will provide prompt and effic

at a reasonable cost to the American people and which w

time of global war.
recommended changes. The reasons stated in last year’s 

the recommended changes are deemed adequate and w

repeated at this time. However, the modifications to the pr

mended changes and the reasons therefor are set out herein

b. In last year’s report, it was recommended, inter ali

limits on punishment under Article 15 of the Uniform C

permits imposition of non-judicial punishment by command

should, insofar as forfeitures of pay of officers are concer

creased from one-half of an officer’s or warrant officer’s pay 

for a period not exceeding 1 month, to one-half of his mo

for a period not exceeding 2 months (see Annual Report

Recommendation pp 9 10). Experience has indicated tha

increase is required to provide Commanders with sufficient 

impose punishment under Article 15 so that adequate an

action may be taken in order to avoid the necessity of tria

martial with its consequent adverse effect on the usefuln

officer in the command and its resultant cost in time, money 

power. It is therefore recommended that the limits on 

be increased so as to permit imposition of forfeitures of on

month’s pay per month for a period not exceeding 3 mont

c. The United States Court of Military Appeals and 

Advocates General of the Armed Forces, as well as the Gen

sel of the Department of the Treasury, joined in recomm

necessary amendments to the Uniform Code so as to provid

by a one officer court in all, except capital, cases where an a

counsel, and the convening authority agree before-hand to s

The prescribed qualifications of the officer who could serv

officer court required, inter alia, that he have the grade 

lieutenant colonel or commander (See Annual Report, Fir

mendation, pp. 4 5). Since this officer must have the qu

of a law officer and must be certified as competent to serv

officer court by The Judge Advocate General of the Service 

the Air Force recommends that the qualifications as to 

lowered to major or lieutenant commander. Such offic

-

-

-
late review, certifies that in his opinion the errors of law r

in the petition materially prejudiced the substantial rig

accused (Annual Report, Exhibit D, p. 31). Further stu

dicated that a different procedure for processing petition

of review should be instituted.

Three and one-half years’ experience under the Uniform 

clearly indicated that the unlimited authority of an accused 

the United States Court of Military Appeals for a grant 

under Article 67 (b) (3) has resulted in numerous frivolo

being made to the court with attendant excessive costs in t

and manpower as a result thereof.

At the present time, with approximately three million 

armed forces, the most recent budget request for the amo

to operate the Court for one year amounted to $320,000. I

of a war and complete mobilization, the number of perso

armed forces would increase tremendously. For examp

World War II there were approximately twelve million 

uniform. It can thus be expected that the cost of main

Court under its present setup would, in the event of war, 

least four times its present cost and that even then, opera

appellate system would be nearly impossible.

Additionally, experience has clearly indicated that mo

fare is carried on in a global capacity. In order to avo

delays in processing cases arising during a global war, th

has provided in Article 68 of the Uniform Code for execut

ity to establish branch offices under an Assistant Judge 

General with Boards of Review in such branch offices. I

petitions for review to the Court of Military Appeals 

emanating from the four corners of the world with the ad

portation costs arising from forwarding the records of tria

ington, D. C., so that the Court could determine whether 

should be granted. In addition, the delay in processing suc

which is inherent in the present system would, in wartime, 

reach staggering proportions.
petitions). In the event of all out mobilization, since the 

personnel on active duty in the armed forces would prob

ruple it is only reasonable to expect that the above figures o

presented and those denied would likewise be increased at 

times their present size. Accordingly, it is deemed essenti

some means to lighten the work load of the United State

Military Appeals and to eliminate excessive and frivolo

so that the present system of military justice might func

event of war.

Each time the accused petitions the Court of Military A

a grant of review, the record of trial must be forwarded to 

pro-forma pleadings by appellate defense and governme

must be filed, and the Court must review the matter to 

whether a petition for grant of review should be granted. 

every case of this nature, only general allegations of erro

without specifying any error of law, and the reply is likewis

denial. In addition, nearly every such petition, where 

error is assigned, is eventually denied review by the Court. 

cedure results in unnecessary waste of time, money and man

no benefit to an accused’s substantial rights.

It is therefore recommended that petitions for grant 

should be forwarded to the United States Court of Milita

only after The Judge Advocate General of the Service con

issued a Certificate of Good Cause Shown. The procedu

an accused may obtain such a Certificate would require tha

days of receipt of the decision of the Board of Review, t

may petitionThe Judge Advocate General of the service 

for a Certificate of Good Cause Shown. The Judge Advoca

shall then refer the case to a Judicial Appeals Board con

his office. Judicial Appeals Boards constituted by The 

vocate General will be composed of at least three membe

senior officers above the rank of lieutenant colonel or c

who have at least ten years legal experience, and who ar

of the bar of a Federal Court or of the highest court of a S
the Certificate, to the United States Court of Military A

its consideration and decision as to whether the petition 

of review should be granted. If branch offices of The J udg

General are established under the authority of Article 68, th

Appeals Boards as well as Boards of Review will also be 

in the branch offices. This procedure will avoid the exc

and lengthy delays incident to frivolous appeals being 

by the Court and still guarantee an accused the right to a

the decision of the Board of Review. Moreover, this s

make it possible for the present appellate procedure pr

the Uniform Code of Military Justice to function during 

3. a. Pursuant to the mandate of Article 6 (a), U

of Military Justice, that The Judge Advocate General 

frequent inspections in the field in the administration of m

tice, Major General Reginald C. Harmon and senior mem

staff have visited numerous Air Force installations in 

States and overseas during the period of this report.

b. Continued emphasis was given during this period to t

tation and retraining of Air Force prisoners deemed pot

storable to a duty status. While most Air Force confineme

have active rehabilitation programs in operation, the 3320

ing Group, Amarillo Air Force Base, Texas, has return

mately 900 prisoners to a duty status since its activation in 

1952. During the past year certain follow-up studies m

Amarillo operation revealed that out of a group of about 5

returned to duty, 77% readjusted to productive duty s

remaining 23% were unsuccessful in readjusting to prod

as evidenced by their commission of further offenses and 

from the Air Force under conditions other than honorable

c. Concerted effort has been continuously directed toward 

the number of Judge Advocate General Department Res

Reserve Training Units. During 1953, the number of Tra

was increased from 39 to 68 and the number of Air Fo

attorneys either assigned to or training with these units ha
Air Force Reserve Training program.

d. In alleviating the critical shortage of qualified cour

the Air Force has made great strides in the electronic cour

field utilizing a closed microphone system. We are now ab

an airman typist, who has the proper background in milit

procedure and is otherwise qualified, to become a suitable 

porter in a few weeks time. The Air Force is now using a

such court reporters and more are being trained at the pres

e. Another development during the year was the creatio

career field for airmen in the semi-professional legal specia

corrects the many difficulties previously encountered in s

listed personnel with all other branches of the Air Force a

tive field.

/. During the period of this report, 175 judge advoca

assigned and on active duty with the Judge Advocate Gen

partment of the Air Force were graduated from the Judge 

General’s course conducted at the Command and Staff S

University, Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama. However, 

observed that virtually all new legal officer procurement fo

two years will come from college ROTC sources insuring co

background in military service and a basic course in mil

the retention time of these officers on active duty (2 years) 

tially reduced by the time spent in attending the course, t

both ways and accrued leave time; the shortage of prospectiv

makes the cost per student prohibitive, and a substantial por

benefits derived from the School could be provided by on-the

ing in Air Force legal offices during the early stages of t

assigned law school graduate’s tour of active duty. Acco

decision was made in October 1954 to close the School and 

a standby basis effective 1 January 1955.

g. At the close of the period, there were 83 commands 

Force exercising general court-martial jurisdiction. 

court-martial jurisdiction has been granted by the Secret

fense to three commands, and general authorization for 
trial received in the Office of The Judge Advocate Genera

ination pursuant to Article 69 during the same period:

Total 

b. The following table shows the workload of the B

view during the same period:

X Ja

SI D

On hand at beginning of period 

Referred for review 3

Reviewed 3

Pending at close of period 

c. From 1 January to 31 December 1954, 51 percent of 

whose cases were received in the Office of The Judge Adv

eral for review pursuant to Article 66 requested represent

pellate defense counsel before Boards of Review.

d. Based upon the number of cases reviewed by board

during the period, 11.6 percent were forwarded to the Un

Court of Military Appeals pursuant to the three subdivi

Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 67 (b). Of th

forwarded, all except five were based upon petitions of 

for grant of review by the Court of Military Appeals. 

during the period were certified by The Judge Advocate G

there was one mandatory review by the Court of Milita

Petitions were granted by the Court of Military Appeals 

period in 3 percent of the cases which were petitioned, or 

of the total number of cases reviewed by the Boards of Rev

R eginald C . H a r m o n 

Major General, IJ

The Judge Advocate General, United States A

—_____________________________________________________

______________________________ 

_________________________________________ 

_____________________________________________________ 

____________________________________ 
“ (15) ‘Convening authority’ shall be construed to refer to the 

convened the court, an officer commanding for the time being, a 

command, or any officer exercising general court martial jurisdictio

(b) Article 12 is amended to read as follow s:

“ART. 12. Confinement with enemy prisoners prohibited.

“No member of the armed forces of the United States shall b

confinement in immediate association with enemy prisoners or o

nationals not members of the armed forces of the United States, 

a member of the armed forces of the United States may be confine

States confinement facilities with members of the armed forces 

foreign nations.”

(c) Article 15 (a) (1) (C) is amended by deleting the words “on

the end thereof and substituting therefor the words “three months”.

(d) Article 15 (a) (2) (E) is amended by deleting the words 

upon a person attached to or embarked in a vessel,” .

(e) Article 15 (a) (2) is amended by (1) changing the period a

clause (F ) to a semicolon and inserting immediately thereafter th

and (2) inserting a new clause (G ), as follows:

“ (G) forfeiture of not to exceed one half of one month’s pay.”

( f ) Article 16 is amended to read as follow s:

“ART. 16. Courts-martial classified.

“ (a) There shall be three kinds of courts martial in each o

forces, namely:

(1) general courts martial;

(2) special courts martial; and

(3) summary courts-martial.

“ (b) A general court martial shall consist of a law officer and 

of members not less than five, except that a general court martial 

only of a law officer if, prior to the convening of the court, the ac

requested in writing, and the convening authority has consented t

“ (c) A special court martial shall consist of any number of 

less than three, except that a special court martial shall consist 

officer if, prior to the convening of the court, the accused has so 

writing, and the convening authority has consented thereto.

“ (d) A summary court martial shall consist of one officer.”

(g) Article 18 is amended by inserting the following new sente

ately after the first sentence:

“However, a general court martial consisting only of a law offi

adjudge the penalty of death.”

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-
of the highest court of a State of the United States and who is ce

qualified for such duty by The Judge Advocate General of the ar

which he is a member.

“ (b) A law officer appointed as a general court martial shal

to having the qualifications specified in (a) above, be (1) specifical

be qualified for such duty by The Judge Advocate General of the 

of which he is a member, and (2) serving in a grade above captain 

of the Army, Air Force, or Marine Corps, and in a grade above lie

member of the Navy or Coast Guard.

“ (c) No person shall be eligible to act as law officer in a cas

the accuser or a witness for the prosecution or has acted as investi

or as counsel in the same case.

“ (d) The law officer shall not consult with the members of th

than on the form of the findings and the sentence as provided i

except in the presence of the accused, trial counsel, and defense 

shall he vote with the members of the court.”.

(k) Article 31 is amended to read as follow s:

“ART. 31. Compulsory self incrimination prohibited.

“ (a) No person subject to this code shall compel any person t

himself or to answer any question the answer to which may tend t

him.

“ (b) No person subject to this code who occupies an off

with a military law enforcement or military crime detection agen

otherwise engaged in or responsible for the conduct of an officia

vestigation, shall, during the course of such an investigation, in

request any statement from an accused or any other person wh

tigator has reasonable grounds to suspect that the person interroga

mitted the particular offense under investigation without first info

the nature of the accusation and advising him that he does not h

any statement regarding the offense of which he is accused or s

that any statement made by him may be used as evidence agai

trial by court-martial.

“ (c) No person subject to this code shall compel any perso

statement or produce evidence before any military tribunal if t

or evidence is not material to the issue and may tend to degrade 

“ (d) No statement obtained from any person in violation o

or through the use of coercion, unlawful influence, or unlawful indu

be received in evidence against him in a trial by court martial.”.

-

-

-
on the record..

(n) Article 41 (b) is amended to read as follow s:

“ (b) Each accused and trial counsel shall be entitled to one 

challenge, but the law officer and an officer appointed as a special c

shall not be challenged except for cause.” .

(o) Article 51 is amended by inserting at the end thereof th

“ (d) The foregoing provisions of this article shall not apply 

or special court martial consisting of only one officer. Notwiths

other provision of this code, the officer who is appointed as su

martial shall determine all questions of law and fact arising durin

such court and shall, in the event of conviction of the accused, 

appropriate sentence.” .

(p) The second sentence of article 51 (b) is amended to read a

“Any such ruling made by the law officer of a general court m

any interlocutory question other than the question of the accused’s 

be final and shall constitute the ruling of the court, but the law 

change any such ruling at any time during the trial.” .

(q) Article 52 is amended by inserting at the end thereof the fo

“ (d) This article shall not apply to a general or special c

consisting of only one officer.” .

( r) Article 54 is amended to read as follow s:

“ART. 54. Record of trial.

“ (a) Each court martial shall keep a separate record of the 

of the trial of each case brought before it. A record of trial by a c

in which the sentence adjudged requires review by a board of r

article 66 shall contain a complete verbatim account of the proc

testimony before the court, and shall be authenticated in such ma

be required by regulations which the President may prescribe. All o

of trial shall contain such matter and be authenticated in such ma

be required by regulations which the President may prescribe.

“ (b) A copy of the record of the proceedings of each genera

court martial shall be given to the accused as soon as authenticate

(s) Article 57 (b) is amended by inserting at the end thereof t

new sentence:

“The President may prescribe other periods during which a 

confinement may be interrupted and such periods shall be excluded 

the service of the term of confinement.”.

(t ) Article 65 (a ) is amended to read as follow s:

“ (a) When the convening authority has taken final action 

court martial case and the sentence as approved by him includes a 

discharge or exceeds a sentence that could have been adjudged 

-

-

-

-

-
Specialist or lawyer of the Navy, or a law specialist or lawyer o

Guard or Treasury Department. In addition to returning such re

convening authority with a direction that certain action be taken

exercising general court martial jurisdiction, or the authority de

the Secretary of the Department, may take the same action with res

records as is authorized for the convening authority. Such reco

transmitted and disposed of as the Secretary of the Department m

by regulations.” .

(w) Article 66 (b) is amended to read as follows:

“ (b) The Judge Advocate General shall refer to a board o

record in every case of trial by court martial in which the sentence, 

affects a general or flag officer, or extends to death, or to the dism

officer, cadet, or midshipman. He shall also refer to a board of revie

in every case of trial by court martial in which the sentence, as appro

to dishonorable or bad conduct discharge, or to confinement for 

more, unless such dishonorable or bad-conduct discharge, or conf

one year or more, was adjudged in a case where the accused plead

each offense of which he was found guilty.” .

(x) Article 66 (e) is amended to read as follows:

“ (e) The Judge Advocate General may dismiss the charges w

board of review has ordered them dismissed or whenever the boar

has ordered a rehearing and he finds a rehearing impracticable. Ot

Judge Advocate General shall, unless there is to be further action b

dent, or the Secretary of the Department or the Court of Milita

instruct the convening authority to take action in accordance with 

of the board of review. If the board of review has ordered a re

the convening authority finds a rehearing impracticable, he may 

charges.”.

(y ) The catchline or article 67 is amended to read as follows:

“ART. 67. Review by the judicial appeals board and the Court 

Appeals.” .

(z) Article 67 (b) (3) is amended to read as follows:

“ (3) All eases reviewed by a board of review in which, u

of the accused, The Judge Advocate General, under article 67 (

certificate of good cause shown and the Court of Military Appea

review.” .

(aa) Article 67 (c) is amended to read as follow s:

“ (c) The Judge Advocate General shall constitute in his 

more judicial appeals boards, each composed of not less than three 

of whom

-

-

-

-

— 
petition within 15 days after receiving it. If the judicial appeals 

mously determines that the accused has not shown good cause fo

shall deny the petition. Otherwise, The Judge Advocate General sh

forward a certificate of good cause shown, together with the pet

Court of Military Appeals. Procedure for judicial appeals boards 

accordance with uniform rules prescribed by the Judge Advocates 

such rules may provide that determination by such boards will be 

alone. The board of review shall have jurisdiction over the ca

petition and certificate is received by the Court of Military Appeals

shall act upon the petition within 30 days after receiving it.” .

(bb) The third sentence of article 67 (d) is amended to read as 

“ In a case reviewed upon a certificate of good cause shown is

Judge Advocate General, such action need be taken only with resp

specified in the grant of review.”.

(cc) Article 67 (f) is amended to read as follow s:

“ (f) After it has acted on a case, the Court of Military A

direct The Judge Advocate General to return the record to the board 

further review in accordance with the decision of the court. The 

cate General may dismiss the charges whenever the Court of Military 

ordered them dismissed or whenever the court has ordered a rehea

finds a rehearing impracticable. Otherwise, The Judge Advocate G

unless there Is to be further action by the President or the Secr

Department, instruct the convening authority to take action in acco

the decision of the court. If the court has ordered a rehearing and t

authority finds a rehearing impracticable, he may dismiss the char

(dd) Article 68 is amended to read as follow s:

“ART. 68. Branch offices.

“ Whenever the President deems such action necessary, he ma

Judge Advocate General to establish a branch office, under an Ass

Advocate General, with any distant command, and to establish in 

office one or more boards of review and judicial appeals boards. Su

Judge Advocate General and any such board of review and judi

board may perform for that command, under the general superv

Judge Advocate General, the duties which The Judge Advocate Ge

board of review and a judicial appeals board in his office would 

required to perform in respect of all cases involving sentences n

approval by the President.” .

(ee) Article 69 is amended to read as follow s:

“ART. 69. Review in the office of The Judge Advocate General.

“ Every record of trial by court-martial, in which there has be

of guilty and a sentence, the appellate review of which is not otherw
“ART. 70. Appellate counsel.

“ (a) The Judge Advocate General shall detail in his office o

officers as appellate Government counsel, and one or more officers 

defense counsel, who are qualified under the provisions of article 27 

“ (b) Appellate Government counsel shall represent the Unite

for the board of review, the judicial appeals board, or the Court 

Appeals when directed to do so by The Judge Advocate General.

“ (c) Appellate defense counsel shall represent the accused 

board of review, the judicial appeals board, or the Court of Militar

(1) when he is requested to do so by the accused;

(2) when the United States is represented by counsel; or

(3) when The Judge Advocate General has transmitted a 

Court of Military Appeals.

“ (d) The accused has the right to be represented before th

Military Appeals, the judicial appeals board, or the board of review 

counsel if provided by him.

“ (e) Military appellate counsel shall also perform such other 

connection with the review of court martial cases as The Judge Advoc

directs.” .

(gg) Article 71 is amended to read as follow s:

“ART. 71. Execution of sentences; suspension of sentence.

“ (a) No court martial sentence extending to death or involvin

or flag officer shall be ordered executed until approved by the Presiden

approve the sentence or such part, amount, or commuted form of t

as he sees lit, and may suspend the execution of the sentence or any 

sentence, as approved by him, except the death sentence. After t

of a sentence extending to death by the convening authority, an ac

accrue no pay or allowances unless such sentence is set aside or disa

a sentence extending to death is not imposed upon a new trial or reh

“ (b) Except as provided in (d) and (e) below, no sentence 

of a sentence extending to the dismissal of an officer (other than a 

flag officer), cadet, or midshipman shall be ordered executed unt

by the Secretary of the Department, or such Under Secretary or Assi

tary as may be designated by him. He shall approve the sentence o

amount, or commuted form of the sentence as he sees fit, and may 

execution of any part of the sentence as approved by him. In tim

national emergency, he may commute a sentence of dismissal to redu

enlisted grade. A person who is so reduced may be required to se

duration of the war or emergency and six months thereafter.

-

-
may, at any time after he approves a sentence extending to dis

dishonorable or bad conduct discharge, and upon the specific re

accused, order the dismissal or discharge executed if the accused 

parole or the sentence to confinement has been executed. I f the se

sustained upon appellate review, or in any subsequent proceedings

be taken in accordance with article 75.” .

(hh) Article 72 (a) is amended to read as follows:

“ (a) Prior to the vacation of the suspension of a special 

sentence which as approved includes a bad-conduct discharge, or 

court martial sentence which as approved includes a bad conduct 

exceeds a sentence that could have been adjudged by a special 

the officer having special court martial jurisdiction over the prob

hold a hearing on the alleged violation of probation. At such hea

bationer shall be represented by counsel if he so desires. No hea

required if the probationer is serving a sentence to confinement, 

civil court, in a civilian confinement facility.”

(ii) Article 73 is amended to read as follows:

“ART. 73. Petition for a new trial.

“At any time within 2 years after approval by the convening a

court martial sentence which extends to death, dismissal, dishono

conduct discharge, or confinement for one year or more, the accu

tion The Judge Advocate General for a new trial on grounds of new

evidence or fraud on the court. It the accused’s case is pending b

of review or before the Court of Military Appeals, The Judge Adv

shall refer the petition to the board or court, respectively, for 

board of review or the Court of Military Appeals, as appropriate

mine whether a new trial, in whole or in part, should be granted, 

appropriate action under article 66 or article 67, respectively. O

Judge Advocate General may grant a new trial in whole or in 

vacate or modify the findings and sentence in whole or in part.”

(jj) Article 75 (a) is amended to read as follow s:

“ (a) Except as provided in (d) below, and under such r

the President may prescribe, all rights, privileges, and property a

executed portion of a court martial sentence which has been set 

approved, except an executed dismissal or discharge, shall be re

a new trial or rehearing is ordered and such executed portion is 

sentence imposed upon the new trial or rehearing.”

(kk) Article 75 is amended by inserting at the end thereof the 

“ (d) Where a sentence of dismissal or of dishonorable o

discharge which has been executed under article 71 (e) is not su

appellate review, the Secretary of the Department shall, except as he

-

- -

-

- 

- 
(II) Article 95 is amended to read as follow s:

“ART. 95. Arrest and physical restraint.

“Any person subject to this code who resists apprehension or br

or who escapes from physical restraint lawfully imposed shall be pu

court martial may direct.”

(mm) The following is inserted as article 123a:

“ART. 123a. Making, drawing, or uttering check, draft, or or

sufficient funds.

“Any person subject to this code who

(1) for the procurement of any article or thing of value, or

(2) for the payment of any past due debt or other obligation

(3) for any purpose with intent to defraud,

makes, draws, utters, or delivers any check, draft, or order for the 

money upon any bank or other depository, knowing at the time tha

or drawer has not or will not have sufficient funds in, or credit wit

or other depository for the payment of that check, draft, or order i

its presentment, shall be punished as a court martial may direct. T

drawing, uttering, or delivering by a maker or drawer of a check

order, payment of which is refused by the drawee because of insuff

o f the maker or drawer in its possession or control, shall be prima fa

of his intent to defraud and of his knowledge of insufficient funds i

with, that bank or other depository, if the maker or drawer shall no

the holder thereof the amount due thereon within five days afte

notice in person, or writing, that the check, draft, or order has no

The word ‘credit’, as used herein, shall be construed to mean arra

understanding, express or implied, with the bank or other deposit

payment of that check, draft, or order.”

Sec.2. This Act shall become effective on the first day of the tenth 

approval of this Act.

-

— 

-
Subsection ( c ) amends article 15 (a) (1) (C) to provide that a c

ficer exercising general court martial jurisdiction may impose o

warrant officer of his command forfeiture of one half of his pay p

period not exceeding three months.

Subsection, (d) amends article 15 (a) (2) (E) to provide that 

officer may confine an enlisted member of his command for a perio

seven consecutive days.

Subsection (e) amends article 15 (a) (2) to provide that a c

ficer may impose on an enlisted member of his command forfeit

of one month’s pay.

Subsection (/) amends article 16 to provide that a general cou

consist of a law officer and five or more members, or of a law 

prior to the convening of such court, the accused requests in wri

tried before a law officer only and the convening authority co

Further, a special court-martial shall consist of three or more m

single officer only, if prior to the convening of such court, the 

quests in writing and the convening authority consents thereto.

Subsection (y) amends article 18 to provide that the death pena

adjudged by a general court martial consisting of a law officer on

Subsection (h) amends articles 22 (b) and 23 (b) to provide th

authority not subordinate in command to the accuser shall be “com

ity” within the meaning thereof, and that a court may, in any ca

by superior competent authority when deemed desirable by him.

Subsection (i) amends article 25 (a) to provide that an officer 

cial court martial shall have the qualifications specified for a law 

cle 26 (a) .

Subsection (j ) amends article 26 to provide that a law officer a

eral court martial shall, in addition to the qualifications specified 

officer serving in the grade of major or lieutenant commander or 

specifically certified for such duty by The Judge Advocate Gener

Subscection (k) amends article 31 using as a guide the limita

by Judge Latimer in his dissenting opinion in United States v. W

(No. 647), 8 CMR 48.

Subsection (I) extends the provisions of article 37 to include st

ing convening authorities and commanding officers.

-

-

-

- 

-
to courts martial consisting of one officer only.

Subsection (r) amends article 54 to provide that there shall be 

record of trial in each case where the sentence adjudged requires r

case by a board of review, and that such records shall be authent

cordance with regulations prescribed by the President.

Subsection (s) amends article 57 (b) to authorize the President 

periods during which a sentence to confinement may be interrupte

such periods are to be excluded in computing the service of the ter

ment.

Subsections (f) and ( ee ) amend articles 65 (a) and 69, respectivel

that the record of trial of a general court martial which adjudged a 

extending to a bad-conduct discharge, or not exceeding the sentenc

have been adjudged by a special court-martial, shall be transmit

posed of as the Secretary of the Department may prescribe by regula

ther, article 69 is amended to provide that The Judge Advocate G

discretion may refer any case reviewed by him to a board of review 

vided in article 69, or he himself may have the power and may take 

in the case as a board of review can take under article 66 (c) a

need not affirm a finding of guilty or a sentence found correct in law 

Subsections ( ft) and (w) amend articles 65 (b) and 66 (b), res

provide that cases involving a dishonorable or bad-conduct disch

finement for one year or more where the accused has pleaded gu

offense of which he has been found guilty need not be reviewed b

review. The effect of this amendment is to cause such cases to be rev

article 69.

Subsection (v) amends article 65 (c) to provide that upon the re

mary courts martial and special courts martial not involving a 

discharge, a supervisory authority may, in addition to his authority 

record to the convening authority for action, take any action on 

that is authorized for the convening authority. Further lawyers 

are made eligible to review records of trial by summary and sp

martial.

Subsection (x ) amends article 66 (e) to authorize The Judge Advo

to dismiss the charges when the board of review so directs or when 

the rehearing ordered by the board of review is impracticable.

Subsection (z) amends article 67 (b) (3) to provide that the Cour

Appeals must consider petitions for grant of review only when upo

the accused, The Judge Advocate General issues a certificate of good 

-

- -

Report

o f

THE G ENERAL COUNSEL

o f

THE DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

(UNITED STATES COAST G UARD)

January 1,1954 to December 31,1954

courtmartial for every 1,200 enlisted men. It has been 

normal rate for general courts-martial is 60 cases per 10,00

per year. In the Coast Guard only 8.3 enlisted men per 1

tried by general court-martial. Comparative figures f

received in 1953 and 1954 follow:

General courts martial 

Special courts martial 

Summary courts martial 

Total 

The continued decline of an already small incidence of cou

bears witness to the existence of a healthy state of morale 

personnel of the Coast Guard. It also reflects a diminution 

offenses, which perennially constitute the bulk of all co

charges.

2. A t the close of the year 32 officers of the Coast G

attorneys certified as competent to perform the duties of 

trial counsel and defense counsel, pursuant to the Unifor

Military Justice, Articles 26 and 27, and an additional 38 o

certified as qualified trial and defense counsel. The assig

a majority of these officers, however, are not primarily conc

military justice duties. In the Fourteenth Coast Guard D

District Commander has been empowered by the Secret

Treasury, with the concurrence of the Secretary of the 

appoint Navy attorneys as law officers, trial counsel an

counsel for general courts-martial in his district, pursuan

graphs 4g (3) and 6a of the Manual for Courts-Martia

1954 the services of Navy attorneys were utilized upon four 

District legal officers were furnished regularly with th

opinions of the United States Court of Military Appeals

of the Coast Guard Board of Review, the Coast Guard Law 

the Army JAG Chronicle Letter and the Navy JAG Journa

- ____________________________________________ 

- _____________________________________________ 

- __________________________________________ 

_______________________________________________________ 
e. The results of trial were modified by the Board of 

cases; in 2 of them findings and sentence were set aside and 

ordered; in 3 others both findings and sentence were mod

others the sentence alone was modified, and in 3 cases th

were modified but not the sentence. Forty-one cases we

without correction. In 5 of the latter the General Counse

pension action upon the punitive discharge contemporan

transmittal of the Board of Eeview decision to the accused

of 53 cases reaching the Board of Eeview, the results of 

modified by either the Board or the General Counsel in 

32 percent of the total. Pursuant to Article 67 of the Co

were certified to the United States Court of Military Ap

2 others were appealed upon the petition of the accused.

D a vid W . K e n d a ll, 

General Coimsel,

Treasury Departmen

U « G O VERN M EN T P R IN T IN G O F . .