At Bilecki Law Group, 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 is suspected of burning property in an attempt to defraud an individual or business entity such as an insurance company is at risk of a conviction under Article 126(c) of the UCMJ: Burning with Intent to Defraud. The defrauding of a person or company through property destruction is a serious criminal offense under Article 126(c) of the UCMJ. Military careers have been destroyed, finances ruined, and freedoms lost forever because of a conviction of this UCMJ offense.
- A punitive discharge may be given as part of your sentence after being convicted of this Article 126(c) offense. You may lose your pay and allowances and could be required to pay back any bonus you received.
- A dishonorable discharge may, unfortunately, be the least of your worries. This offense carries with it a maximum prison sentence of a decade. You could lose your freedoms for years if the trial goes against you.
- Even if you escape a long-term prison sentence, you may be held in figurative debt servitude for years, and possibly even decades, if you attempt to pay back the money you owe from the destruction of property.
There is no greater threat to your future right now than your upcoming trial. Do not delay a moment longer. Call Bilecki Law Group for a confidential consultation TODAY.
What Is Article 126(c) (Burning with Intent to Defraud) of the UCMJ?
All of the articles within the UCMJ requires prosecutors to prove beyond a reasonable doubt a handful of critical assumptions, known as elements, to convict you of a crime.
For a soldier to be convicted of burning with intent to defraud under Article 126(c), the following elements must be proven:
- That the accused willfully and maliciously burned or set fire to certain property owned by a certain person or organization;
- That such burning or setting on fire was with the intent to defraud a certain person or organization.
Summary of the Elements of Article 126(c) (Burning with Intent to Defraud):
Prosecutors must prove that a service member intentionally set fire to an owned property with the intent to defraud a certain person or persons. Current Article 126(c) does not require the former Article 134 terminal element.
Military Defense Attorney for Article 126(c) (Burning with Intent to Defraud): Winning Your Case
Military strategy 101: Know Your Enemy. You don’t stand a chance in your trial unless you know what you’re up against. And you must understand before you walk into your trial that the military and its prosecutors will stop at nothing to see you convicted, dishonorably discharged, and thrown into jail. Period. We’ve seen it time and time again.
Accused service members go into their trials underprepared and underrepresented. Experienced military prosecutors run circles around these service members. If these service members had prepared beforehand and secured better representation, they may not have become a statistic in the military’s extremely high conviction rate. Bilecki Law Group has been representing American veterans and active duty service members since its founding days.
Tim Bilecki brought his experience as a former Army JAG defense attorney to found one of the most reputable military law firms operating in the world today. Our understanding of the UCMJ and Article 126(c) cases, combined with our access to incredible talent and our rapid response times to our clients, has led to proven results for our clients again and again. Let’s look at these benefits in more detail:
- Our understanding of the UCMJ and Article 126(c) cases: Tim Bilecki and Ben Gold are highly talented and tenacious advocates for service members facing a court-martial. They provide exemplary service and hard-hitting court-martial defense as experienced litigators operating in the private sector.
- Access to incredible talent: Even the best military defense attorneys require the support of an experienced team. Tim and Ben can choose independent investigators and experts for the problem the case presents, direct their work and bring the findings into your defense.
- We get the defense moving: Bilecki Law Group takes clients around the world. If you are in desperate need of representation, contact us about the allegation and the deadlines you face. Tim and Ben start the defense remotely and both travel for trials and boards. Your defense starts before we get on the plane.
A conviction under Article 126(c) could destroy your military career forever. Call us TODAY to set up a confidential consultation, before it’s too late.
We Defend Service Members Against Burning With Intent to Defraud Charges
The threat to your military career and civilian future is both clear and present. Bilecki Law Group has been actively defending our service members from nightmare court-martial scenarios for years. Our case history makes it clear why we are one of the most reputable names in the world of court-martial defense. We do not ask you to take us at our word. See for yourself why service members choose Bilecki Law Group to defend their interests in court.
Maximum Punishments and Sentencing Parameters
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 ranges below are stated in months and are limited where the offense has a lower confinement maximum. A special court-martial can impose no more than its own authorized limit, even when an offense or category allows more. The maximum is not a prediction of the sentence in your case.
| Offense | Maximum confinement | Category or criteria | Confinement range in months |
|---|---|---|---|
| Burning with intent to defraud | 10 years | Category 2 | 1–36 |
Reduction to E-1 applies to enlisted personnel. Dismissal, rather than a dishonorable or bad-conduct discharge, is the authorized punitive separation for commissioned officers, including commissioned warrant officers, and cadets and midshipmen. The authorized punishment also depends on the offense date and court-martial forum.
Facing an Allegation?
Contact Bilecki Law Group
Frequently Asked Questions About article 126(c): Burning with Intent to Defraud
What Is the Maximum Possible Punishment for Article 126(c) (Burning with Intent to Defraud)?
Burning with Intent to Defraud is a serious offense in the military which is punishable up to a maximum of:
- Reduction to E-1
- Forfeiture of all pay and allowances
- Confinement for up to 10 years
- A dishonorable discharge
I Accidentally Set Fire to Military Property. Can I Still Be Convicted?
A genuinely accidental fire does not satisfy Article 126(c)’s requirement of willful and malicious burning with intent to defraud. But prosecutors may dispute that it was an accident. We test the origin of the fire, the forensic work and the supposed financial motive so they cannot turn a mistake into an intentional fraud without proving it.
Does Bilecki Law Group Conduct Its Own Investigations?
Yes. Tim and Ben direct the investigative work and can select independent investigators and experts for the issues your case actually presents. If you are either accused of a crime or believe you may be a suspect in a crime, contact our law firm TODAY to schedule a confidential consultation.