If the accused is tried in absentia, the sentencing authority may not punish the accused for the unauthorized absence but may consider the accused's voluntary absence as an indication of the accused's rehabilitation potential. As a general rule, the court members cannot be instructed on, and cannot consider, the administrative consequences of their sentence. Command policies and directives regarding the disposition of offenders or directives impacting on the military corrections system are not appropriate sentencing factors and the military judge has a sua sponte duty to exclude them from consideration. The court members may, however, consider that a punitive discharge deprives an individual of substantially all benefits administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs. Although the guidelines in the area are unclear, there is some authority which suggests that a military judge may consider administrative consequences of a sentence, such as rules governing parole eligibility, when sitting as the sentencing authority.
Specific deterrence is also a proper sentencing consideration.
In a court-martial with sentencing by members, the trial counsel will ordinarily prepare a sentence worksheet tailored to reflect all sentencing alternatives. During deliberations, the court members use the sentence worksheet as a guide to assist them in putting their sentence in proper form. The worksheet is marked as an appellate exhibit and attached to the record of trial. These prerequisites also apply to the military judge when acting as sentencing authority. Thus, in seeking to arrive at an appropriate sentence, Judge W. properly took into account the rules governing parole eligibility.