UCMJ Article 92: Failure to Obey Order or Regulation

A service member of the United States armed forces who fails to obey a general order or regulation issued by a military department or a commanding officer will be subject to charges under Article 92 of the UCMJ.

The orders and regulations issued by top military brass and bureaucratic agencies are in many cases conflicting, confusing and ineffectively promoted within the ranks. But a failure to comply with Article 92 will incur some very harsh penalties for any service member caught in the government’s crosshairs:

  • You could face confinement for years simply by failing to follow an order that you had no idea existed.
  • You may be dishonorably discharged from the military, ending your military career and threatening your civilian career with a tarnished reputation.
  • All pay and benefits will be forfeited. Your healthcare, your pension, your paycheck—all of it will be taken from you.

A single mistake should never cost you your military career, let alone your freedom. Contact Bilecki & Tipon today for a free consultation into your case.

What Is Article 92 of the UCMJ?

undefinedEvery punitive article of the UCMJ requires prosecutors to prove beyond a reasonable doubt a handful of critical assumptions—known as elements—to convict you of a crime. Article 92 describes three possible offenses that a service member may be accused of.

From most to least serious:

  • (1) Violation of or failure to obey a lawful general order or regulation.
    • (a) That there was in effect a certain lawful general order or regulation
    • (b) That the accused had a duty to obey it; and
    • (c) That the accused violated or failed to obey the order or regulation
  • (2) Failure to obey other lawful order.
    • (a) That a member of the armed forces issued a certain lawful order;
    • (b) That the accused had knowledge of the order;
    • (c) That the accused had a duty to obey the order; and
    • (d) That the accused failed to obey the order
  • (3) Dereliction in the performance of duties
    • (a) That the accused had certain duties
    • (b) That the accused knew or reasonably should have known of the duties; and
    • (c) That the accused was (willfully) (through neglect or culpable inefficiency) derelict in the performance of those duties.

Summary of the Elements of Article 92: The act of disobeying a broad general order or regulation isn’t as serious a crime as disobeying a direct command given by a superior officer. With that said, Article 92 still conveys harsh sentencing upon service members who—whether by the willful dereliction, negligence, or inefficiency—fail to obey an order or regulation.

Military Defense Attorney for Article 92 of the UCMJ: Strategies and Tactics

Article 92 provides many avenues for a military defense attorney to crush the government’s case against you. We’ll start by asking some essential questions into the circumstances of your case, and follow up with additional questions to help us define our trial strategy:

  • Does this order or regulation conflict with a different order or regulation issued by another commanding officer of higher or lower status? Have you been put in a “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” situation? We’ll determine where the conflict is and show that it was impossible for you to follow the law under both commands.
  • Has the order or regulation been properly promulgated throughout the ranks? Do all service men and women under that command know of the order? Is the order or regulation confusing in its wording or expression? Any one of these may be grounds for an acquittal in your court-martial case.
  • Were you neither willfully nor negligently breaking with that order? A case may be made that you were not properly trained or prepared to follow through with a specific order or regulation, as ineptitude is defined as an unpunishable offense under Article 92.

You can’t change the past, but you can influence your future hearing or trial with a ruthlessly effective military defense attorney. Contact Bilecki & Tipon today for a free consultation into your case.

Experienced Military Defense Lawyers for Article 92 Charges

General orders and regulations in the military are often terribly confusing, notoriously conflicting and ineffectively promoted. Bilecki & Tipon has firsthand experience defending service members against these orders and can help you secure the best possible outcome in your case.

Here are just a few of the stunning upsets by the defense attorneys at Bilecki & Tipon:

Bilecki & Tipon will help you fight back against charges under Article 92: Failure to Obey Order or Regulation

Frequently Asked Questions About Article 92

What Is a General Order or Regulation As Defined by Article 92 in the Military?

Any order or regulation passed down from the highest echelon of the military—including the President, Secretary of Defense, Homeland Security, or any military department—as well as any general officer with troops under his or her command, has the ability to issue a general order or regulation that affects all military personnel under that command.

General orders are often broad in scope, heavy-handed, and many times, not properly communicated across the branch or subdivision of the armed forces they seek to reshape. An overly broad order alone may be enough to secure an acquittal for our clients.

What Is the Maximum Possible Punishment for Article 92: Failure to Obey Order or Regulation?

Article 92 is a broad collection of offenses, all of which are loosely related to the act of disobedience to perform an order or regulation.

The maximum sentence under Article 92 includes:

Violation of or failure to obey lawful general order or regulation:

  • Reduction to E-1
  • Forfeiture of all pay and allowances
  • Confinement for 2 years
  • Dishonorable discharge

Violation of or failure to obey other lawful order:

  • Reduction to E-1
  • Forfeiture of all pay and allowances
  • Confinement for 6 months
  • Bad Conduct discharge

Dereliction of duty is a lesser punishment under Article 92 that varies depending on the intent or capability of the service member. Maximum sentencing under willful dereliction of duty is a Bad conduct discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for 6 months.

What Our Clients Are Saying About Us

  • Bilecki & Tipon, LLLC His knowledge and experience were evident during the Article 32 where he seemed to sort of take control of the court room.
  • Bilecki & Tipon, LLLC This was the best investment I have ever made in my life. Again I am forever in debt to this firm.
  • Bilecki & Tipon, LLLC Mr. Bilecki and his law group ARE that best team.
  • Bilecki & Tipon, LLLC Mr. Bilecki and his team are extremely aggressive, thorough, and know what they are doing. They saved my life.
  • Bilecki & Tipon, LLLC Do not go into the courtroom by yourself. Go in with a confident hard charging legal firm like Bilecki & Tipon.
  • Bilecki & Tipon, LLLC Mr. Bilecki and his associates are amazingly qualified and skilled in handling UCMJ cases.
Prev Next

Request Your Case Evaluation

You deserve a fighting chance on your day in court. When it comes time to decide who your defense attorney will be, make that decision count.

    • Please enter your name.
    • This isn't a valid phone number.
      Please enter your phone number.
    • This isn't a valid email address.
      Please enter your email address.
    • Please make a selection.
    • Please enter a message.