Addressing Allegations of Misconduct Under Article 92 UCMJ – Court Martial Attorneys
Understanding Article 92: Failure to Obey Orders, Regulations, and Standards
Article 92 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) is one of the most frequently charged offenses across all branches of the military. It covers a wide range of alleged misconduct, including failure to obey lawful orders, dereliction of duty, and violations of written regulations. While many service members consider Article 92 to be a “lower-level” offense, the reality is far more serious. Article 92 charges can lead to court-martial convictions, reduction in rank, confinement, administrative separation, and long-term career damage.
Commands often use Article 92 as a catch-all charge to punish—or separate—service members when other allegations lack evidence. Unfortunately, this means innocent service members often face Article 92 charges for misunderstandings, minor mistakes, or politically motivated actions.
Gonzalez & Waddington, Attorneys at Law has represented thousands of service members facing Article 92 allegations. Michael and Alexandra Gonzalez-Waddington are internationally known for dismantling weak government cases, exposing command bias, and defending clients in courts-martial and administrative boards worldwide.
What Constitutes an Article 92 Violation?
Article 92 covers three major categories of misconduct:
1. Failure to Obey a Lawful Order
This includes direct orders from a commander, NCO, or superior officer.
2. Violation of a General Order or Regulation
This is one of the most commonly charged forms of Article 92. General orders include:
- Command policies
- Installation-level directives
- General orders from senior commanders
- Policies on alcohol, weapons, relationships, or conduct
3. Dereliction of Duty
This involves negligently, willfully, or knowingly failing to perform assigned duties. Examples include:
- Improper supervision
- Failure to maintain equipment
- Failure to stand watch correctly
- Failure to follow safety procedures
- Failure to report required information
Because Article 92 is so broad, commands often charge it anytime they believe a service member “should have done more.” It is frequently paired with other charges to pressure the accused into accepting NJP or administrative separation.
Common Scenarios Leading to Article 92 Allegations
- Alcohol-related incidents (violating curfew or policy)
- Fraternization or inappropriate relationships
- Sexual misconduct allegations paired with Article 92 violations
- Failure to follow safety rules resulting in an accident
- Failure to report contact with foreign nationals
- Disobeying a no-contact or military protective order
- Negligent handling of weapons or equipment
- Sleeping on duty or improper watchstanding
- Unauthorized wear of awards or uniforms
- Failure to comply with medical, training, or readiness requirements
Each scenario carries different evidentiary challenges—and many are based on subjective interpretations, not clear violations.
Why Article 92 Allegations Are So Dangerous
Although Article 92 is not always a felony-level offense, it can have catastrophic consequences for your career. Commands frequently weaponize Article 92 to justify administrative separation, elimination boards, GOMORs, or career-ending reprimands.
Consequences may include:
- Article 15/NJP
- Summary, special, or general court-martial
- Loss of rank and pay
- Administrative separation or BOI elimination
- GOMORs, Letters of Reprimand (LORs), or negative counseling
- Security clearance suspension
- Removal from special-duty assignments
- Career derailment and loss of promotion eligibility
Many service members underestimate Article 92 until it is too late. Prosecutors treat it as a foundational charge that strengthens their case for harsher administrative or criminal actions.
Key Legal Defenses Against Article 92 Allegations
Although Article 92 is broad, it is also highly defensible—if approached strategically.
1. Challenging the Lawfulness of the Order
The government must prove the order or regulation was lawful. If the order was ambiguous, unlawful, outside the issuing authority’s scope, or lacked proper publication, the charge can be dismissed.
2. Showing Lack of Knowledge
You cannot violate an order you did not know existed. Many general orders are poorly communicated—especially at large joint installations or deployed locations.
3. Demonstrating the Order Was Not Specific Enough
Orders must be clear, specific, and directly applicable. Vague policies are not enforceable under Article 92.
4. Exposing Investigative Bias or Command Pressure
Many Article 92 allegations arise during large-scale investigations into unrelated misconduct. Commands sometimes pile on Article 92 charges to justify punishment.
5. Showing the Violation Was Not Willful
For dereliction or failure-to-obey allegations, the government must prove willfulness or negligence—not simple human error.
6. Attacking the Evidence
We examine:
- Digital communications
- Witness credibility
- Email timelines
- Policy publications
- Training and briefing records
7. Asserting a Defense of Mistake of Fact
In many cases, misunderstandings—not misconduct—explain the alleged violation.
8. Arguing Selective or Retaliatory Enforcement
If the accused is singled out for enforcement while others were not, this may reveal unlawful command influence or discrimination.
How Gonzalez & Waddington Defend Article 92 Cases
Our defense strategies are tailored to the facts and the courtroom dynamics. We are known for:
- Exposing the unlawful nature of questionable orders
- Attacking the government’s interpretation of regulations
- Using digital forensic analysis to dismantle allegations
- Aggressive cross-examination of investigators and accusers
- Building compelling narrative defenses
- Winning at Article 15 hearings, separation boards, and courts-martial
Michael and Alexandra Gonzalez-Waddington are internationally recognized for their trial skills and ability to turn the tide in cases involving ambiguous or exaggerated misconduct.
When Article 92 Allegations Lead to Separation Boards or BOIs
Commands often attempt to remove service members for Article 92 violations—even when evidence is weak. This is especially common when allegations involve:
- Sexual misconduct investigations
- Alcohol or drug allegations
- Domestic incidents
- Safety violations
- Leadership concerns
We routinely fight and win these separation cases, saving careers and restoring reputations.
Contact Our Article 92 Defense Lawyers
If you are accused of violating Article 92, do NOT attempt to handle it alone. Even minor allegations can snowball into career-ending consequences. Our firm can help you build a powerful defense that protects your rank, benefits, and future.
➤ Contact Gonzalez & Waddington for Immediate Article 92 Defense
Article 92 UCMJ – Frequently Asked Questions
Can I be convicted of Article 92 without knowing about the order?
Possibly, but the government must prove you knew or reasonably should have known about the order. Many general orders are poorly communicated or unclear—these gaps create strong defense opportunities.
Is Article 92 a career-ending charge?
It can be. A conviction—or even substantiated allegation—can lead to GOMORs, separation boards, clearance suspension, and lost promotions. Aggressive defense early in the process often prevents long-term damage.
Can Article 92 lead to a court-martial?
Yes. Serious violations, especially those paired with other misconduct, often result in special or general courts-martial. We have successfully defended Article 92 cases at every level of military justice.
Why hire Gonzalez & Waddington?
Michael and Alexandra Gonzalez-Waddington are internationally recognized military defense lawyers with unmatched experience challenging unlawful orders, weak regulations, and flawed investigations. Their strategic approach often turns “open-and-shut” cases into victories.
Facing allegations of Article 92 Misconduct can be incredibly stressful for service members and their families. These allegations often carry serious consequences, including non-judicial punishment, administrative separation, or even court-martial. It’s natural to feel overwhelmed or uncertain about what the future holds if you’ve been accused of violating a lawful order or regulation under Article 92 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). Whether you’re an enlisted member or an officer, understanding the implications of Article 92 Misconduct is the first step toward taking control of your situation. A clear understanding of your rights and the military justice process can help you make confident and informed decisions. This article aims to break down the complexities of Article 92 Misconduct and provide insight into how you can best protect your career, your reputation, and your future. If you or someone you care about is facing Article 92 allegations, you are not alone. Help and support are available to guide you every step of the way.
Understanding What Article 92 Misconduct Really Means
Article 92 Misconduct refers to the failure to obey a lawful order, regulation, or general order within the military. This offense lies at the core of military discipline and order. When someone violates this rule, whether deliberately or due to neglect, the consequences can be significant. Article 92 covers three main areas: failure to obey a general order or regulation, failure to obey other lawful orders, and dereliction of duty.
For example, if a service member knowingly disregards a safety regulation while handling hazardous materials, that may qualify as Article 92 Misconduct. In another case, refusing to follow a direct order during deployment can also meet the threshold for misconduct. It is essential to note that intention plays a role, but even accidental noncompliance can result in disciplinary action. Understanding exactly what qualifies as Article 92 Misconduct is critical to building a successful defense and protecting your military record.
Why Handling Article 92 Misconduct Matters So Much
Allegations under Article 92 carry real-world consequences that can adversely affect every area of a service member’s life. From career advancement and security clearances to personal reputation, the implications are wide-ranging and often long-lasting. Military justice is strict and quick-moving, which means the effects of mishandling a case can be swift and damaging.
Beyond punitive measures, these situations can cause a tremendous amount of stress, both mentally and emotionally. The ripple effect can impact family life, financial status, and long-term plans. Understanding the far-reaching consequences of Article 92 Misconduct is essential in order to respond effectively and avoid unnecessary hardship.
- You receive a lawful order during training but fail to follow it due to carelessness. This results in UCMJ action and removal from leadership training.
- A soldier ignores a posted safety policy on base. A fellow service member is injured, and the soldier is charged with dereliction of duty.
- An enlisted member refuses a direct command due to disagreement with a superior. This leads to non-judicial punishment and a mark on their permanent record.
How the Article 92 Misconduct Process Unfolds in Military Settings
- Step 1: The allegation is reported to the appropriate chain of command or legal officer. This may include written statements or sworn complaints.
- Step 2: The command may initiate an inquiry or a formal investigation. This involves collecting evidence, witness statements, and possibly a commander’s inquiry.
- Step 3: Depending on the findings, the service member may face non-judicial punishment, administrative actions, or a court-martial. Legal defense and appeals are available at each stage.
Helpful Strategies for Handling Article 92 Misconduct Wisely
Your Most Common Questions About Article 92 Misconduct Answered
What Gonzalez & Waddington Can Do to Help You
Gonzalez & Waddington has a proven history of defending military personnel accused of Article 92 Misconduct. With decades of experience in military law, our attorneys understand the unique pressures service members face when confronted with disciplinary action. We work diligently to ensure that our clients receive a fair and aggressive defense, whether dealing with administrative actions, non-judicial punishment, or court-martial proceedings.
Our team combines legal expertise with deep insight into military culture, ranks, and chain-of-command dynamics. That means we tailor each strategy to your individual case, maximizing your chances of a favorable outcome. From initial consultations to final resolutions, Gonzalez & Waddington is committed to protecting your rights, your career, and your reputation, offering both legal power and peace of mind.
Bottom Line: What You Need to Know About Article 92 Misconduct
