Article 92 UCMJ | Failure to Obey Orders and Regulations
Article 92 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) is one of the most frequently charged offenses in the military.
It covers failure to obey lawful orders or regulations and can apply to both minor infractions and major misconduct.
Convictions under Article 92 can lead to court-martial, confinement, reduction in rank, forfeitures, and punitive discharge.
Gonzalez & Waddington, renowned military defense lawyers, explain what you need to know about defending against Article 92 charges in 2025.
Watch: Defending Military Justice Cases
What Does Article 92 Cover?
- Failure to obey lawful general orders or regulations – disobeying written or standing regulations.
- Failure to obey other lawful orders – ignoring or refusing specific direct orders.
- Dereliction of duty – willfully or negligently failing to perform assigned responsibilities.
Maximum Punishments
- General order/regulation violation: Dishonorable discharge, 2 years confinement, total forfeitures, reduction in rank.
- Other lawful order violation: Bad-conduct discharge, 6 months confinement, forfeitures, reduction.
- Dereliction of duty: Up to 6 months confinement and forfeitures (worse if willful).
Defenses Against Article 92
- Order was unlawful: Only lawful orders must be obeyed.
- Lack of knowledge: The accused may not have been aware of the regulation or order.
- Impossibility: Circumstances made compliance impossible.
- Ambiguity: Vague or unclear orders may not support conviction.
- No duty existed: For dereliction cases, proving the accused had no assigned responsibility.
Pro Tips for Defending Article 92 Cases
- Scrutinize the order: Determine whether it was properly issued and lawful.
- Challenge notice: Did the accused actually know about the regulation or order?
- Document compliance attempts: Show efforts made to obey despite obstacles.
- Leverage command climate: Sometimes orders are enforced selectively or unfairly.
- Focus on intent: Negligence versus willfulness can make a huge difference in punishment.
Common Mistakes in Article 92 Defense
- Assuming minor infractions won’t escalate—many become full-blown court-martial cases.
- Not challenging the legality or clarity of the order.
- Failing to document communications and attempts to comply.
- Waiting too long to hire experienced civilian counsel.
Call Gonzalez & Waddington | Experienced Court-Martial Defense
Article 92 charges can derail a career and lead to serious criminal consequences.
Gonzalez & Waddington defend service members worldwide facing Article 92 charges, separation boards, boards of inquiry, and court-martials.
Call 1-800-921-8607 or visit
ucmjdefense.com to protect your future.
FAQs: Article 92 UCMJ
What makes an order lawful under Article 92?
An order must relate to military duty, be clear, specific, and not violate constitutional rights.
Can I be charged for violating a regulation I didn’t know about?
Yes, but lack of knowledge can be a defense if the government cannot prove notice.
Is dereliction of duty always criminal?
No. The prosecution must prove willful or negligent failure. Honest mistakes may not be enough.
What’s the difference between Article 92 and Article 90 disobedience?
Article 90 involves willful disobedience of a superior commissioned officer, which carries harsher penalties.
Can a civilian lawyer defend me against Article 92 charges?
Yes. Civilian counsel with UCMJ experience can aggressively challenge the government’s case and protect your career.
