2008 edition - Fort Sam Houston - U.S. Army

2008 edition - Fort Sam Houston - U.S. Army 2008 edition - Fort Sam Houston - U.S. Army

samhouston.army.mil
from samhouston.army.mil More from this publisher
18.08.2013 Views

Pun. Art. 131 APPENDIX 23 1746 of title 28 United States Code, which was also enacted as part of Pub.L. No. 94–550. Text of section 1746 of title 28, United States Code § 1746. Unsworn declarations under penalty of perjury. Whenever, under any law of the United States or under any rule, regulation, order, or requirement made pursuant to law, any matter is required or permitted to be supported, evidenced, established, or proved by the sworn declaration, verification, certificate, statement, oath, or affidavit, in writing of the person making the same (other than a deposition, or an oath of office, or an oath required to be taken before a specified official other than a notary public), such matter may, with like force and effect, be supported, evidenced, established, or proved by the unsworn declaration, certificate, verification, or statement, in writing of such person which is subscribed by him, as true under penalty of perjury, and dated, in substantially the following form: (1) If executed without the United States: “I declare (or certify, verify, or state) under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on (date). (Signature)” (2) If executed within the United States, its territories, possessions, or commonwealths: “I declare (or certify, verify, or state) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on (date). (Signature)” If someone signs a statement under penalty of perjury outside a judicial proceeding or course of justice, and Article 107 (false official statement) is not applicable, it may be possible to use Article 134 (clause 3) (see paragraph 60) to charge a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1621. Text of section 1621 of title 18, United States Code § 1621. Perjury generally Whoever— (1) having taken an oath before a competent tribunal, officer, or person, in any case in which a law of the United States authorizes an oath to be administered, that he will testify, declare, depose, or certify truly, or that any written testimony, declaration, deposition, or certificate by him subscribed, is true, willfully and contrary to such oath states or subscribes any material which he does not believe to be true; or (2) in any declaration, certificate, verification, or statement under penalty of perjury as permitted under section 1746 of title 28, United States Code, willfully subscribes as true any material matter which he does not believe to be true; is guilty of perjury and shall, except or otherwise expressly provided by law, be fined not more than $2,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. This section is applicable whether the statement or subscription is made within or without the United States. 2004 Amendment: Subsection (2)(b) was amended to comply with United States v. Gaudin, 515 U.S. 506 (1995), which held that when materiality is a statutory element of an offense, it must be submitted to the jury for decision. Materiality cannot be removed from the members’ consideration by an interlocutory ruling that a statement is material. See Gaudin, 515 U.S. at 521 (“It is commonplace for the same mixed question of law and fact to be assigned to the court for one purpose, and to the jury for another.”); and at 517 (“The prosecution’s failure to provide minimal evidence of materiality, like its failure to provide minimal A23-18 evidence of any other element, of course raises a question of ’law’ that warrants dismissal.”). d. Lesser included offenses. 1991 Amendment: Subparagraph d was amended by deleting false swearing as a lesser included offense of perjury. See United States v. Smith, 26 C.M.R. 16 (C.M.A. 1958); MCM 1984, Part IV, para. 79c(1). Although closely related to perjury, the offense of false swearing may be charged separately. 58. Article 132— Frauds against the United States c. Explanation. This paragraph is based on paragraph 211 of MCM, 1969 (Rev.). e. Maximum punishment. The maximum punishments have been revised. Instead of three levels ($50 or less, $50 to $100, and over $100) only two are used. This is simpler and conforms more closely to the division between felony and misdemeanor penalties contingent on value in property offenses in civilian jurisdictions. 2002 Amendment: The monetary amount affecting the maximum punishments has been revised from $100 to $500 to account for inflation. The last change was in 1969 raising the amount to $100. The value has also been readjusted to realign it more closely with the division between felony and misdemeanor penalties in civilian jurisdictions. See generally American Law Institute, Model Penal Code and Commentaries Sec. 223.1 (1980) (suggesting $500 as the value). 59. Article 133— Conduct unbecoming an officer and gentleman c. Explanation. This paragraph is based on paragraph 212 of MCM, 1969 (Rev.). See Parker v. Levy, 417 U.S. 733 (1974) (constitutionality of Article 133). For a discussion of Article 133, see United States v. Giordano, 15 U.S.C.M.A. 163, 35 C.M.R. 135 (1964); Nelson, Conduct Expected of an Officer and a Gentleman: Ambiguity, 12 A.F.JAG L.Rev. 124 (Spring 1970). As to subparagraph (1), see 1 U.S.C. § 1; Pub.L. No. 94–106, § 803, 89 Stat. 537–38 (Oct. 7, 1975). e. Maximum punishment. A maximum punishment is established for the first time in order to provide guidance and uniformity for Article 133 offenses. f. Sample specifications. Some sample specifications for Article 133 in MCM, 1969 (Rev.) were deleted solely to economize on space. 60. Article 134— General article Introduction. Paragraph 60 introduces the General Article. Paragraph 61–113 describe and list the maximum punishments for many offenses under Article 134. These paragraphs are not exclusive. See generally Parker v. Levy, 417 U.S. 733 (1974); United States v. Sadinsky, 14 U.S.C.M.A. 563, 34 C.M.R. 343 (1964). E x c e p t a s o t h e r w i s e n o t e d i n t h e A n a l y s e s o f p a r a g r a p h s 61–113, the offenses listed below are based on paragraph 127 c (Table of Maximum Punishments), paragraph 213 f, and Appendix 6 (sample specifications 126–187) of MCM, 1969 (Rev.). E i g h t o f f e n s e s p r e v i o u s l y l i s t e d ( a l l o w i n g p r i s o n e r t o d o u n - authorized acts, criminal libel, criminal nuisance, parole violation, statutory perjury, transporting stolen vehicle in interstate commerce, unclean accoutrements, and unclean uniform) are not list e d h e r e b e c a u s e t h e y o c c u r s o i n f r e q u e n t l y o r b e c a u s e t h e

gravamen of the misconduct is such that it is more appropriately charged under another provision. c. Explanation. Except as noted below, this paragraph is based on paragraph 213 a through e of MCM, 1969 (Rev.). (1) In general. See Secretary of the Navy v. Avrech, 418 U.S. 676 (1974); Parker v. Levy, supra (constitutionality of Article 134 upheld). (4)(c)(ii)Federal Assimilative Crimes Act. See United States v. Wright, 5 M.J. 106 (C.M.A. 1978); United States v. Rowe, 13 U.S.C.M.A. 302, 32 C.M.R. 302 (1962). (5)(a) Preemption doctrine. See United States v. McCormick, 12 U.S.C.M.A. 26, 30 C.M.R. 26 (1960) (assault on child under 16); United States v. Hallet, 4 U.S.C.M.A. 378, 15 C.M.R. 378 (1954) (misbehavior before the enemy); United States v. Deller, 3 U . S . C . M . A . 4 0 9 , 1 2 C . M . R . 1 6 5 ( 1 9 5 3 ) ( a b s e n c e o f f e n s e s ) ; United States v. Norris, 2 U.S.C.M.A. 236, 8 C.M.R. 36 (1953) (larceny). But see the following cases for examples of where offenses not preempted: United States v. Wright, supra (burglary of automobile); United States v. Bonavita, 21 U.S.C.M.A. 407, 45 C.M.R. 181 (1972) (concealing stolen property); United States v. Maze, 21 U.S.C.M.A. 260, 45 C.M.R. 34 (1972) (unlawfully altering public records); United States v. Taylor, 17 U.S.C.M.A. 595, 38 C.M.R. 393 (1968) (self-inflicted injury with no intent to avoid Service) United States v. Gaudet, 11 U.S.C.M.A. 672, 29 C.M.R. 488 (1960) (stealing from mail); United States v. Fuller, 9 U.S.C.M.A. 143, 25 C.M.R. 405 (1958) (fraudulent burning); United States v. Holt, 7 U.S.C.M.A. 617, 23 C.M.R. 81 (1957) (graft, fraudulent misrepresentation). ( 5 ) ( b ) C a p i t a l o f f e n s e . S e e U n i t e d S t a t e s v . F r e n c h , 1 0 U.S.C.M.A. 171, 27 C.M.R. 245 (1959). ( 6 ) ( b ) S p e c i f i c a t i o n s u n d e r c l a u s e 3 . S e e U n i t e d S t a t e s v . Mayo, 12 M.J. 286 (C.M.A. 1982); United States v. Perry, 12 M.J. 112 (C.M.A. 1981); United States v. Rowe, supra; United States v. Hogsett, 8 U.S.C.M.A. 681, 25 C.M.R. 185 (1958). (6)(c)Specifications for clause 1 or 2 offenses not listed. See United States v. Sadinsky, supra; United States v. Mardis, 6 U.S.C.M.A 624, 20 C.M.R. 340 (1956). 61. Article 134— (Abusing a public animal) c. Explanation. This new paragraph defines “public animal.” 62. Article 134— (Adultery) c. Explanation. (1) Subparagraph c(2) is based on United States. v. Snyder, 4 C.M.R. 15 (1952); United States v. Ruiz, 46 M.J. 503 (A. F. Ct. Crim. App. 1997); United States v. Green, 39 M.J. 606 (A.C.M.R. 1994); United States v. Collier, 36 M.J. 501 (A.F.C.M.R. 1992); United States v. Perez, 33 M.J. 1050 (A.C.M.R. 1991); United States v. Linnear, 16 M.J. 628 (A.F.C.M.R. 1983); Part IV, paragraph 60c(2)(a) of MCM. Subparagraph c(3) is based on United States v. Poole, 39 M.J. 819 (A.C.M.R. 1994). Subparagraph c(4) is based on United States v. Fogarty, 35 M.J. 885 (A.C.M.R. 1992); Military Judges’ Benchbook, DA PAM 27-9, paragraph 3- 62-1 and 5-11-2 (30 Sep. 1996). See R.C.M. 916(j) and (l)(1) for a general discussion of mistake of fact and ignorance, which cannot be based on a negligent failure to discover the true facts. (2) When determining whether adulterous acts constitute the offense of adultery under Article 134, commanders should con- ANALYSIS OF PUNITIVE ARTICLES sider the listed factors. Each commander has discretion to dispose of offenses by members of the command. As with any alleged offense, however, under R.C.M. 306(b) commanders should dispose of an allegation of adultery at the lowest appropriate level. As the R.C.M. 306(b) discussion states, many factors must be taken into consideration and balanced, including, to the extent practicable, the nature of the offense, any mitigating or extenuating circumstances, the character and military service of the milit a r y m e m b e r , a n y r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s m a d e b y s u b o r d i n a t e commanders, the interests of justice, military exigencies, and the effect of the decision on the military member and the command. The goal should be a disposition that is warranted, appropriate, and fair. In the case of officers, also consult the explanation to paragraph 59 in deciding how to dispose of an allegation of adultery. 63. Article 134— (Assault— indecent) c. Explanation. This paragraph is based on paragraph 213 f(2) of M C M , 1 9 6 9 ( R e v . ) . S e e U n i t e d S t a t e s v . C a i l l o u e t t e , 1 2 U.S.C.M.A. 149, 30 C.M.R. 149 (1961) regarding specific intent. S e e a l s o U n i t e d S t a t e s v . H e a d s p e t h , 2 U . S . C . M . A . 6 3 5 , 1 0 C.M.R. 133 (1953). Gender-neutral language has been used in this paragraph, as well as throughout this Manual. This will eliminate any question about the intended scope of certain offenses, such as indecent assault such as may have been raised by the use of the masculine pronoun in MCM, 1969 (Rev.). It is, however, consistent with the construction given to the former Manual. See, e.g., United States v. Respess, 7 M.J. 566 (A.C.M.R. 1979). See generally 1 U.S.C. § 1 (“unless the context indicates otherwise … words importing the masculine gender include the feminine as well ….”). d. Lesser included offenses. See United States v. Thacker, 16 U.S.C.M.A. 408, 37 C.M.R. 28 (1966); United States v. Jackson, 31 C.M.R. 738 (A.F.B.R. 1962). 2007 Amendment: This paragraph has been replaced in its entirety by paragraph 45. See Article 120 (e) Aggravated Sexual Contact, (h) Abusive Sexual Contact, and (m) Wrongful Sexual Contact. 64. Article 134— (Assault— with intent to commit murder, voluntary manslaughter, rape, robbery, sodomy, arson, burglary, or housebreaking) c. Explanation. This paragraph is based on paragraph 213 f(1) of MCM, 1969 (Rev.). 2007 Amendment. This paragraph has been amended for consistency with the changes to Article 118 under Section 552 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006, P.L. 109-163, 6 January 2006. See subsection (d) of Section 552. 65. Article 134— (Bigamy) Pun. Art. 134 c. Explanation. This paragraph is based on paragraph 213 f(9) of M C M , 1 9 6 9 ( R e v . ) . S e e a l s o U n i t e d S t a t e s v . P r u i t t , 1 7 U.S.C.M.A. 438, 38 C.M.R. 236 (1968), concerning the defense of mistake. 66. Article 134— (Bribery and graft) c. Explanation. This paragraph is new and is based on United States v. Marshall, 18 U.S.C.M.A. 426, 40 C.M.R. 138 (1969); A23-19

Pun. Art. 131 APPENDIX 23<br />

1746 of title 28 United States Code, which was also enacted as<br />

part of Pub.L. No. 94–550.<br />

Text of section 1746 of title 28, United States Code<br />

§ 1746. Unsworn declarations under penalty of perjury.<br />

Whenever, under any law of the United States or under any<br />

rule, regulation, order, or requirement made pursuant to law, any<br />

matter is required or permitted to be supported, evidenced, established,<br />

or proved by the sworn declaration, verification, certificate,<br />

statement, oath, or affidavit, in writing of the person making<br />

the same (other than a deposition, or an oath of office, or an oath<br />

required to be taken before a specified official other than a notary<br />

public), such matter may, with like force and effect, be supported,<br />

evidenced, established, or proved by the unsworn declaration,<br />

certificate, verification, or statement, in writing of such person<br />

which is subscribed by him, as true under penalty of perjury, and<br />

dated, in substantially the following form:<br />

(1) If executed without the United States: “I declare (or certify,<br />

verify, or state) under penalty of perjury under the laws of the<br />

United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct.<br />

Executed on (date).<br />

(Signature)”<br />

(2) If executed within the United States, its territories, possessions,<br />

or commonwealths: “I declare (or certify, verify, or state)<br />

under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.<br />

Executed on (date).<br />

(Signature)”<br />

If someone signs a statement under penalty of perjury outside a<br />

judicial proceeding or course of justice, and Article 107 (false<br />

official statement) is not applicable, it may be possible to use<br />

Article 134 (clause 3) (see paragraph 60) to charge a violation of<br />

18 U.S.C. § 1621.<br />

Text of section 1621 of title 18, United States Code<br />

§ 1621. Perjury generally<br />

Whoever—<br />

(1) having taken an oath before a competent tribunal, officer,<br />

or person, in any case in which a law of the United States<br />

authorizes an oath to be administered, that he will testify, declare,<br />

depose, or certify truly, or that any written testimony, declaration,<br />

deposition, or certificate by him subscribed, is true, willfully and<br />

contrary to such oath states or subscribes any material which he<br />

does not believe to be true; or<br />

(2) in any declaration, certificate, verification, or statement<br />

under penalty of perjury as permitted under section 1746 of title<br />

28, United States Code, willfully subscribes as true any material<br />

matter which he does not believe to be true; is guilty of perjury<br />

and shall, except or otherwise expressly provided by law, be fined<br />

not more than $2,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or<br />

both. This section is applicable whether the statement or subscription<br />

is made within or without the United States.<br />

2004 Amendment: Subsection (2)(b) was amended to comply<br />

with United States v. Gaudin, 515 U.S. 506 (1995), which held<br />

that when materiality is a statutory element of an offense, it must<br />

be submitted to the jury for decision. Materiality cannot be removed<br />

from the members’ consideration by an interlocutory ruling<br />

that a statement is material. See Gaudin, 515 U.S. at 521 (“It<br />

is commonplace for the same mixed question of law and fact to<br />

be assigned to the court for one purpose, and to the jury for<br />

another.”); and at 517 (“The prosecution’s failure to provide minimal<br />

evidence of materiality, like its failure to provide minimal<br />

A23-18<br />

evidence of any other element, of course raises a question of<br />

’law’ that warrants dismissal.”).<br />

d. Lesser included offenses.<br />

1991 Amendment: Subparagraph d was amended by deleting<br />

false swearing as a lesser included offense of perjury. See United<br />

States v. Smith, 26 C.M.R. 16 (C.M.A. 1958); MCM 1984, Part<br />

IV, para. 79c(1). Although closely related to perjury, the offense<br />

of false swearing may be charged separately.<br />

58. Article 132— Frauds against the United States<br />

c. Explanation. This paragraph is based on paragraph 211 of<br />

MCM, 1969 (Rev.).<br />

e. Maximum punishment. The maximum punishments have been<br />

revised. Instead of three levels ($50 or less, $50 to $100, and over<br />

$100) only two are used. This is simpler and conforms more<br />

closely to the division between felony and misdemeanor penalties<br />

contingent on value in property offenses in civilian jurisdictions.<br />

2002 Amendment: The monetary amount affecting the maximum<br />

punishments has been revised from $100 to $500 to account<br />

for inflation. The last change was in 1969 raising the amount to<br />

$100. The value has also been readjusted to realign it more<br />

closely with the division between felony and misdemeanor penalties<br />

in civilian jurisdictions. See generally American Law Institute,<br />

Model Penal Code and Commentaries Sec. 223.1 (1980)<br />

(suggesting $500 as the value).<br />

59. Article 133— Conduct unbecoming an officer<br />

and gentleman<br />

c. Explanation. This paragraph is based on paragraph 212 of<br />

MCM, 1969 (Rev.). See Parker v. Levy, 417 U.S. 733 (1974)<br />

(constitutionality of Article 133). For a discussion of Article 133,<br />

see United States v. Giordano, 15 U.S.C.M.A. 163, 35 C.M.R.<br />

135 (1964); Nelson, Conduct Expected of an Officer and a Gentleman:<br />

Ambiguity, 12 A.F.JAG L.Rev. 124 (Spring 1970). As to<br />

subparagraph (1), see 1 U.S.C. § 1; Pub.L. No. 94–106, § 803, 89<br />

Stat. 537–38 (Oct. 7, 1975).<br />

e. Maximum punishment. A maximum punishment is established<br />

for the first time in order to provide guidance and uniformity for<br />

Article 133 offenses.<br />

f. <strong>Sam</strong>ple specifications. Some sample specifications for Article<br />

133 in MCM, 1969 (Rev.) were deleted solely to economize on<br />

space.<br />

60. Article 134— General article<br />

Introduction. Paragraph 60 introduces the General Article.<br />

Paragraph 61–113 describe and list the maximum punishments for<br />

many offenses under Article 134. These paragraphs are not exclusive.<br />

See generally Parker v. Levy, 417 U.S. 733 (1974); United<br />

States v. Sadinsky, 14 U.S.C.M.A. 563, 34 C.M.R. 343 (1964).<br />

E x c e p t a s o t h e r w i s e n o t e d i n t h e A n a l y s e s o f p a r a g r a p h s<br />

61–113, the offenses listed below are based on paragraph 127 c<br />

(Table of Maximum Punishments), paragraph 213 f, and Appendix<br />

6 (sample specifications 126–187) of MCM, 1969 (Rev.).<br />

E i g h t o f f e n s e s p r e v i o u s l y l i s t e d ( a l l o w i n g p r i s o n e r t o d o u n -<br />

authorized acts, criminal libel, criminal nuisance, parole violation,<br />

statutory perjury, transporting stolen vehicle in interstate commerce,<br />

unclean accoutrements, and unclean uniform) are not list<br />

e d h e r e b e c a u s e t h e y o c c u r s o i n f r e q u e n t l y o r b e c a u s e t h e

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!