At Bilecki Law Group, We believe every service member has earned their right to an aggressive defense on their day in court. We specialize in taking the fight to the prosecution and winning cases that others said were unwinnable.
A service member who knowingly effects another person’s enlistment, appointment, or separation when that person is ineligible under law, regulation, or order may face Article 104b charges. An unsuccessful attempt must instead be assessed under Article 80 and its requirements.
Article 104b gives the government extensive leeway to convey incredibly harsh sentencing upon recruiters, officers, and other service members. Should you be convicted, you will face:
- A dishonorable discharge from the military
- The forfeiture of all allowances and pay
- A sentence of up to five years in jail
You could face jail time simply by ignoring a false statement on someone’s resume. If you’re facing charges under Article 104b, then callBilecki Law Group TODAY to start fighting back.
What Is Article 104b of the UCMJ?
Article 104b of the UCMJ governs conviction and sentencing for crimes related to aiding or assisting a service member’s false enlistment into, the appointment of, or separation from the armed forces. Three elements must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt by prosecutors to convict you of the crime:
- That the accused effected the enlistment, appointment, or separation of the person named
- That this person was ineligible for this enlistment, appointment, or separation because it was prohibited by law, regulation, or order
- That the accused knew of the ineligibility at the time of the enlistment, appointment, or separation
Our take: The government has accused you of helping someone fraudulently enlist, separate or advance within the military. Prosecutors will attempt to prove you were familiar with the service member and had prior knowledge of the requirements as well as the service member’s inability to meet those requirements.
Request A Free Case Evaluation
Military Defense Attorney for Article 104b of the UCMJ: Strategies and Tactics
An Article 104b defense turns on what the government can prove about your actions and knowledge. Our strategy takes into account both the specific context of the case as well as the elements and rules that govern article 104b of the UCMJ.
Here are just a few of the options Bilecki Law Group has at its disposal to fight back against your charges:
- How familiar were you with the service member that broke the law with a fraudulent enlistment, appointment or separation? We examine what you actually knew about that person’s eligibility and whether the evidence supports the knowledge the government must prove.
- Is the prosecution’s case speculative in nature? Do they have actual evidence proving that you knew the enlistment, appointment or separation was fraudulent? If the prosecutors aren’t prepared we’ll wipe the floor with them.
- If the evidence supports the charge, we can still present mitigation and negotiate for a sentence that reflects the full circumstances. We press for a sentence that reflects the complete circumstances and the mitigation we can establish.
Conviction under Article 104b could get you dishonorably discharged and incarcerated. Before you make an assumption about your case, contact the defense attorneys at Bilecki Law Group.
Experienced Military Defense Lawyers for Article 104b Charges
You’re facing an aggressive government opponent that will not hesitate to throw you in prison. Bilecki Law Group has fought and won cases related to Article 104b before, and we can do so again in your case.
Frequently Asked Questions For Article 104b
What Is the Purpose of Article 104b?
Not all service members are happy with their positions in the military. Some want to avoid serving entirely. Others want to advance more rapidly than their peers. Article 104b attempts to curb this activity by targeting the individuals that facilitate it, namely the recruiters, officers and promoters within the armed forces.
What Is the Difference Between Article 104a and Article 104b of the UCMJ?
Article 104a and Article 104b concern the same criminal act, only each focuses on a separate actor:
- Article 104a: Fraudulent Enlistment, Separation or Appointment governs the conviction and punishment of any service member who benefited from the enlistment into, appointment to, or separation from the armed forces.
- Article 104b: Effecting Unlawful Enlistment, Separation or Appointment governs the conviction and punishment of any service member who assisted another service member in the breaking of Article 104a.
What Is the Maximum Possible Punishment for Article 104b of the UCMJ?
Maximum punishment under Article 104b of the UCMJ includes:
- Dishonorable discharge
- Forfeiture of all pay and allowances
- Confinement for up to 5 years
An attempt charge requires proof of a specific intent to commit the offense and an overt act that goes beyond mere preparation and tends to accomplish it. Failure to complete the enlistment, appointment, or separation does not automatically eliminate criminal exposure. We examine whether the evidence proves the completed offense, an attempt, or neither, and calculate the punishment permitted for the charge actually before the court.
Current Article 104b is Category 2 (1–36 months). Its five-year confinement maximum is a separate outer limit, not the ordinary category range.
For noncapital general and special courts-martial, the sentencing parameter system applies when every offense of conviction occurred on or after 28 December 2023. The military judge must sentence within the applicable confinement range unless specific facts justify a departure. If the judge departs, the record must contain a written statement explaining the factual basis. These ranges do not replace the lawful maximum punishment for the offense or the court-martial’s jurisdictional limits. For offenses assigned sentencing criteria instead of a category, the judge must consider those criteria.
The punishment summaries describe the current offense limits for enlisted members; earlier conduct must be assessed under the law applicable on its date. Reduction to E-1 applies to enlisted members. Dismissal applies to commissioned officers, including commissioned warrant officers, cadets, and midshipmen. A dishonorable discharge applies to enlisted members and uncommissioned warrant officers; a bad-conduct discharge applies only to enlisted members. Court-martial jurisdiction and any plea agreement can further limit the sentence.