Opinion ID: 3212939
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Classifications of Courts-Martial

Text: Special courts-martial are one of three classifications of courts-martial that can try persons subject to the military’s jurisdiction: summary, special, and general. 10 U.S.C. § 816. Summary courts-martial have limited jurisdiction and are, as the name suggests, summary in nature. A summary courtmartial consists of a single commissioned officer, who presides over the proceedings, represents both the government and the accused, and makes the ultimate finding as to the accused’s guilt. See id. § 816; Middendorf v. Henry, 425 U.S. 25, 41 (1976); RCM § 1301(b). A summary courtmartial has jurisdiction only if the accused does not object to trial by summary court-martial and, regardless, lacks jurisdiction to try “officers, cadets, aviation cadets, and midshipmen.” 10 U.S.C. § 820. Although summary courtsmartial may try persons for any noncapital offenses under the UCMJ, they may not impose “death, dismissal, dishonorable or bad-conduct discharge, confinement for more than one month, hard-labor without confinement for more than 45 days, restriction to specified limits for more than two months, or forfeiture of more than two-thirds of one month’s pay.” Id. Given their limited jurisdiction and summary nature, convictions by summary courts-martial are not necessarily given weight outside the military justice system. For example, convictions by summary courts-martial are not counted when 9 determining a defendant’s criminal history under the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines. U.S.S.G. § 4A1.2(g). Furthermore, the Supreme Court has determined that summary courtsmartial are not “criminal prosecution[s]” for purposes of the Sixth Amendment’s right to counsel. See Middendorf, 425 U.S. at 42. General courts-martial are the classification of courtsmartial with the authority to impose the most severe punishments. General courts-martial consist of either “a military judge and not less than five members” or, if the accused so requests, “only a military judge,” 10 U.S.C. § 816(1), and “have jurisdiction to try persons . . . for any offense made punishable [under the UCMJ] and may, under such limitations as the President may prescribe, adjudge any punishment not forbidden by this chapter, including the penalty of death . . . .” Id. § 818(a). Courts are in wide agreement that convictions by general courts-martial receive the weight of equivalent convictions in the civilian system. See, e.g., United States v. Shaffer, 807 F.3d 943, 948 (8th Cir. 2015) (“[W]e hold that Shaffer’s conviction by general courtmartial is a conviction in ‘a court of the United States’ within 18 U.S.C. § 3559(c).”); United States v. Grant, 753 F.3d 480, 484-85 (4th Cir. 2014) (holding that a conviction by a general court-martial can qualify as the predicate offense under the Armed Career Criminal Act); United States v. Martinez, 122 F.3d 421, 424 (7th Cir. 1997) (holding that convictions by general courts-martial can serve as the predicate felonies for the felon-in-possession firearm prohibition at 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1)); United States v. MacDonald, 992 F.2d 967, 970 (9th Cir. 1993) (“We hold that a general court-martial is a ‘court’ within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) and a conviction, such as MacDonald’s, for which an individual is 10 punishable for a term exceeding one year, amounts to a ‘crime’ for purposes of § 922(g)(1).”); Rivera-Valencia, 24 I. & N. Dec. at 486-89 (holding that convictions by general courts-martial qualify as convictions under § 237 of the INA); see also U.S.S.G. § 4A1.2(g) (“Sentences resulting from military offenses are counted if imposed by a general or special court-martial.”). Relatedly, the Double Jeopardy Clause bars federal prosecution for an offense previously tried before a general court-martial. See Shaffer, 807 F.3d at 946-47 (“[C]ourt-martial conviction is a bar to successive federal prosecution.”); United States v. Stoltz, 720 F.3d 1127, 1129 (9th Cir. 2013) (“If a servicemember is tried by general or special courtmartial, the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment bars a subsequent civilian prosecution for the same offense.”). Special courts-martial, which are at issue here, are similar to general courts-martial in their general jurisdiction, but they differ with respect to the penalties that can be imposed and with respect to their composition. They have “jurisdiction to try persons . . . for any noncapital offense made punishable by [the UCMJ] and, under such regulations as the President may prescribe, for capital offenses.” 10 U.S.C. § 819. However, they may not impose the penalties of “death, dishonorable discharge, dismissal, confinement for more than one year, hard labor without confinement for more than three months, forfeiture of pay exceeding two-thirds pay per month, or forfeiture of pay for more than one year.” Id.3 3 Although not material to our analysis, this current version of 10 U.S.C. § 819 differs slightly from the version in effect on the date of Gourzong’s conviction. At the time of his conviction, a special court-martial could not impose 11 Special courts-martial consist of either (a) “not less than three members”; (b) “a military judge and not less than three members;” or (c) only a military judge if the accused so requests. 10 U.S.C. § 816(2). Moreover: A bad-conduct discharge, confinement for more than six months, or forfeiture of pay for more than six months may not be adjudged unless a complete record of the proceedings and testimony has been made, counsel . . . was detailed to represent the accused, and a military judge was detailed to the trial, except in any case in which a military judge could not be detailed to the trial because of physical conditions or military exigencies. In any such case in which a military judge was not detailed to the trial, the convening authority shall make a detailed written statement, to be appended to the record, stating the reason or reasons a military judge could not be detailed. Id. § 819. Notably, convictions by special courts-martial, like convictions by general courts-martial, are counted when determining a defendant’s criminal history under the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines. U.S.S.G. § 4A1.2(g) (“Sentences resulting from military offenses are counted if imposed by a confinement of more than six months or forfeiture of pay for more than six months. See National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000, Pub. L. No. 106-65, § 577, 113 Stat. 512, 625 (1999). Under the amended statute, the penalties of confinement and forfeiture of pay can extend up to one year. Id. 12 general or special court-martial.”). Moreover, as the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has noted, “[i]t is also well settled that a general or special court-martial precludes a subsequent civilian criminal prosecution for the same offense.” Stoltz, 720 F.3d at 1128.