A Service Member’s Guide to UCMJ Article 86

When you get wind of an accusation under UCMJ Article 86, it means one thing: your command believes you were absent from your post without permission. This charge, better known as Absence Without Leave (AWOL), isn't just a slap on the wrist. It’s a serious offense that can ignite immediate command action and put your entire military career on the line.

What Happens When You Face a UCMJ Article 86 Charge

Facing an Article 86 accusation is disorienting. It’s not just about missing a formation; it's a formal allegation that you broke a fundamental rule of military life. This charge can escalate incredibly fast, going from a simple question to a full-blown investigation with the potential for heavy administrative and criminal penalties.

Think of an Article 86 charge like a storm warning on the horizon. It signals real danger that requires immediate, calculated action—not panic. The first few moments after you're accused are the most critical. Your command will start documenting everything, gathering witness statements, and methodically building their case against you.

The Initial Command Response

The second your absence is noted, a formal process kicks into gear. Your unit will try to contact you to figure out where you are. If they can’t, they will officially document your status. This isn't just about paperwork; it's the foundation of the government's entire case.

Here’s the typical sequence of events:

• Documentation of Absence: Your leadership will record the exact time and date you were supposed to be at your place of duty and failed to show.
• Status Classification: After a certain amount of time, often 24 hours, your status will likely be officially changed to AWOL. If the absence drags on, it can be escalated to desertion, which is a much more severe charge.
• Investigation Initiated: Your command might start an informal inquiry or even call in military law enforcement (CID, NCIS, OSI, CGIS) to dig into the circumstances of your absence.

Unauthorized absence is one of the most common offenses in military law, and it frequently leads to non-judicial punishment (NJP) or even a court-martial. Its frequency doesn't make it any less serious; in fact, it highlights just how vital the military considers unit readiness and discipline.

Your first moves matter most. What you say and do in the hours after being accused can be the deciding factor between this becoming a minor administrative headache or a career-ending court-martial.

Why Your First Steps Are So Critical

The moment the government starts building its case, you need to start building yours. The single most important step is to get experienced legal counsel before you make any statements to your command or investigators. An attorney is there to protect your rights, tell you exactly how to proceed, and begin mapping out a defense. You can learn more about what happens after a UCMJ accusation and the relevant timelines in our detailed guide.

From the very beginning, you need to preserve any evidence that supports your side of the story and document what happened. Without the right guidance, service members often make irreversible mistakes that completely sink their case before it even gets started.

For service members just finding out they are under investigation, it can feel overwhelming. This checklist is designed to help you organize your thoughts and take control of the situation.

Article 86 Initial Assessment Checklist

Key Question	Why It Matters	Immediate Action
When and where were you supposed to be?	The government must prove the exact time and place of duty. Ambiguity here can be a key defense point.	Write down the specific details of the order you received. Save any texts or emails related to it.
Why were you absent?	The reason for your absence (e.g., medical emergency, family crisis, simple mistake) dictates your defense strategy.	Document your reason with any proof you have: hospital records, messages from family, car repair bills.
When did you return to military control?	The length of the absence directly impacts the potential punishment. A few hours is very different from a few days.	Note the exact date and time you reported back or were apprehended.
Have you spoken to anyone about it?	Any statements made to your command or investigators can be used against you.	Stop talking. Politely invoke your right to remain silent and request to speak with an attorney.
Has anyone contacted you?	Knowing who is investigating (your NCO, the commander, or military police) tells you how serious they are taking it.	Keep a log of all calls, texts, or in-person visits. Do not answer questions.

This checklist is a starting point, not a substitute for legal advice. Each case is unique, and only an experienced military defense attorney can help you navigate the complexities of your specific situation.

Breaking Down an Article 86 Charge: The Three Bricks of the Government’s Case

To get a conviction for AWOL under Article 86, the government can't just point a finger and say you were gone. They have a heavy burden. They must prove three specific, non-negotiable facts—known as the "elements of the offense"—beyond a reasonable doubt.

Think of it like building a brick wall. Each element is a single brick. If the prosecution fails to lay even one of those bricks perfectly, their entire case comes crumbling down. An accusation is just that—an accusation. The real fight is over whether they can prove every single element.

First Element: You Weren't Where You Were Supposed to Be

First, the prosecutor has to prove you were actually absent from your appointed place of duty. This sounds straightforward, but the devil is in the details. The "place of duty" isn't just your barracks or the base. It’s a specific location at a specific time.

This could be morning formation, a watch post, a mandatory safety briefing, or even the passenger seat of a vehicle in a departing convoy. The order that put you on that duty must have been crystal clear and lawful. If the order was vague—like "be ready for movement sometime this morning"—it creates a huge opening for your defense.

A sloppy order from leadership is often the first weak point a defense attorney will attack.

Second Element: You Knew You Were Supposed to Be There

Next up, the government has to prove you knew about the duty. It’s not enough for them to say you should have known. They have to present evidence that you were personally aware of the specific time and place you were required to be. This element is a safeguard against punishing service members for honest mistakes or communication breakdowns.

This is where evidence like text messages from your NCO, signed counseling statements, or sworn testimony from others who heard the order becomes critical. If your squad leader changed the formation time at the last minute and the word never got to you, the government’s case on this element is on shaky ground.

The prosecution must prove actual knowledge. An assumption, a guess, or a vague "he's been in the Army long enough to know" argument often fails to meet the high standard of proof required in a court-martial.

Third Element: Your Absence Was "Without Authority"

Finally, and most importantly, the prosecution must prove your absence was "without authority." This is the heart of most Article 86 defenses. An absence is only a crime if you didn't have permission from someone with the authority to grant it.

This means if you had a genuine, reasonable belief that your absence was approved—even if you were mistaken—you may have a solid defense. The entire case hinges on this single concept of authorization.

This screenshot from Cornell Law School's Legal Information Institute shows the official text of 10 U.S. Code § 886, the statute behind Article 86.

Notice how the law centers on the phrase "without authority." It's the cornerstone of the offense and the primary target for any skilled defense lawyer.

Common Scenarios Where "Authority" Is Debatable

• Verbal Permission: A classic example is when your platoon sergeant says, "Yeah, go ahead, take off for that appointment," but never does the paperwork. This is often called "VOCO" (verbal orders of a commissioned officer), but it applies to NCOs, too.
• Implied Consent: Sometimes, a command’s informal way of doing things can lead you to reasonably believe you had permission. If everyone in your shop regularly leaves early on Fridays without signing out, that past practice could form the basis of a defense.
• True Emergencies: A sudden family crisis or a medical emergency might make it impossible to get formal permission. In these cases, a "necessity" or "duress" defense argues that the emergency justified the unauthorized absence.

By taking apart each of these three elements—the absence itself, your knowledge of the duty, and the lack of authority—a good defense attorney can expose the weak spots in the government’s case. Proving all three beyond a reasonable doubt is a tough job for any prosecutor, and a strong challenge is your best shot at protecting your career.

What Is at Stake With an AWOL Conviction

A conviction under UCMJ Article 86 isn't just a slap on the wrist. It’s a career-altering event that can follow you for years, long after you hang up the uniform. The punishments aren't one-size-fits-all; they scale dramatically based on a single, brutal factor: how long you were gone.

Think of it like a clock that starts ticking the moment you miss formation. Every day adds weight, turning a minor disciplinary issue into a potential felony-level conviction. Grasping this tiered system of punishment is the first step to understanding just how serious an AWOL charge really is.

How Punishment Escalates With Time

The Manual for Courts-Martial (MCM) doesn't mince words. It draws bright lines in the sand, creating distinct levels of legal trouble as your absence drags on. The military justice system uses the three-day and thirty-day marks as critical tripwires. Crossing each one triggers a massive jump in the potential penalties, taking you from the commander's office to a federal courtroom.

The consequences are broken down into a few key tiers:

• Absence of 3 Days or Less: For a very short absence, the maximum punishment is confinement for one month and forfeiture of two-thirds of your pay for that month. It's serious, but often stays at a lower level.
• Absence Over 3 Days (but not more than 30): Once you cross that 72-hour line, the stakes get much higher. The potential confinement jumps to six months, with forfeiture of two-thirds pay for each of those months.
• Absence Over 30 Days: This is where things get truly dangerous. An absence longer than a month is considered an aggravated offense, carrying up to one year in confinement, total forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and a Bad-Conduct Discharge.

These are the maximums, not automatic sentences. The final outcome always comes down to the specific facts of your case, your command's discretion, and the strength of your defense.

The Manual for Courts-Martial outlines a clear progression of penalties for unauthorized absence. This tiered system ensures that the punishment fits the severity and duration of the offense. Below is a table that simplifies these escalating consequences.

UCMJ Article 86 Maximum Punishment Tiers

Duration of Absence	Maximum Confinement	Maximum Pay Forfeiture	Potential Discharge
3 days or less	1 month	2/3 pay for 1 month	None
More than 3 days, not more than 30 days	6 months	2/3 pay per month for 6 months	None
More than 30 days	1 year	All pay and allowances	Bad-Conduct Discharge
Over 30 days, terminated by apprehension	18 months	All pay and allowances	Bad-Conduct Discharge

This table illustrates how crucial time is in an Article 86 case. What starts as a minor infraction can quickly spiral into a career-ending conviction if not handled properly and swiftly.

The Impact of Aggravating Factors

Beyond just the length of your absence, certain circumstances can throw gasoline on the fire. These "aggravating factors" tell the command and the court that your absence wasn't just a personal failing—it was a direct blow to good order and discipline.

An absence is no longer just about a missing person; it's about a critical failure at a critical moment. When aggravating factors are present, the military prosecutes these cases far more aggressively.

The most serious aggravating factors include:

• Missing Important Duty: If you blew off guard duty, a critical watch, or some other vital task, the penalties get worse.
• Missing Movement: This is a big one. Failing to deploy with your ship, aircraft, or unit is a grave offense. It's seen as abandoning your comrades when they need you most and is often charged alongside Article 86.
• Termination by Apprehension: Turning yourself in is one thing. Getting picked up by law enforcement is another. If you're gone for over 30 days and are caught, the maximum confinement can shoot up to 18 months.

The Ultimate Penalty: A Punitive Discharge

Perhaps the most devastating consequence is a punitive discharge. For long-term absences or cases with serious aggravating factors, a court-martial can hand down a Bad-Conduct Discharge or, in the worst scenarios, a Dishonorable Discharge.

This isn't just about getting fired. A punitive discharge strips you of almost all veterans' benefits—the GI Bill, VA home loans, and access to crucial healthcare. To fully grasp these career-ending outcomes, you can learn more about the different types of military discharges and their long-term impact. It's a mistake that transforms a military problem into a lifelong civilian handicap, making it absolutely essential to build the strongest defense possible.

AWOL vs. Desertion: Understanding the Critical Differences

In the military world, you'll hear "AWOL" and "desertion" thrown around like they're the same thing. They're not. Far from it. While both involve being away from your post without permission, the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) draws a massive, career-ending line between them.

Getting this difference right is absolutely critical. One is a serious offense, and the other is one of the gravest a service member can possibly face.

The distinction doesn't really come down to how long you're gone, although that can be used as evidence. It all boils down to a single, powerful concept: intent.

An AWOL charge under UCMJ Article 86 is about the simple act of being absent without authority. The government's job is straightforward: they just have to prove you weren't where you were supposed to be. Desertion, which falls under UCMJ Article 85, is a much heavier accusation because it’s all about what was going on in your head.

The Defining Element of Desertion

To get a conviction for desertion, a prosecutor has to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that you left with the intent to remain away permanently. That single phrase is the entire ballgame.

Think of it this way. Going AWOL is like taking your buddy's car for a joyride without asking. You're in the wrong, and you're going to face the music for it. But desertion is like stealing that same car with a plan to drive it across the country, change the plates, and never bring it back. The initial act might look similar, but the intent behind it makes it an entirely different crime.

This "intent to remain away permanently" is a surprisingly high bar for the government to clear. They can't read your mind, so they are forced to rely on circumstantial evidence to try and build a case about what you were thinking.

Proving intent is the prosecution's greatest challenge in a desertion case. A service member's actions before, during, and after the absence become the battlefield where this legal fight is won or lost.

How the Government Tries to Prove Intent

Since prosecutors can't put your thoughts on the witness stand, they try to paint a picture with your actions. They'll hunt for any sign that suggests you were cutting ties with the military for good.

Here are the classic moves the government looks for to argue you intended to desert:

• Dumping Your Uniform: Getting rid of your military gear is a classic signal that you don't plan on needing it again.
• Getting a Civilian Job: Starting a new career or enrolling in a long-term college program looks like you're building a new, permanent life.
• Moving Your Family or Stuff: Relocating your entire household to another state is a powerful sign you had no plans to return to your duty station.
• Using a Fake ID: Obtaining a false identity or using an alias is probably the strongest evidence of an intent to hide from military authorities forever.

A sharp defense attorney dismantles these points one by one. Maybe you sold some gear because you were in a financial bind and needed cash for a family emergency, not because you were deserting. Every piece of their "evidence" usually has another side to it, and a good lawyer knows how to introduce that alternative story to create reasonable doubt. To learn more about this, you can read about the critical differences between AWOL and desertion and how these cases are fought.

Facing a desertion charge is a whole different war than an AWOL charge. The potential punishments, which can include a Dishonorable Discharge and years in federal prison, are exponentially more severe. Because the entire case hangs on proving your state of mind, having an advocate who can tear down the government's narrative about your intent is absolutely essential.

Building Your Defense Against Article 86 Charges

Getting hit with a UCMJ Article 86 charge is the start of a fight, not the end of your career. An Absence Without Leave (AWOL) accusation feels like the world is crashing down, but a solid defense is usually built on simple, logical arguments that pick apart the government's case. Remember, an accusation is just that—an accusation. It’s not a conviction, and there are many ways to protect yourself.

The best defense is one that dismantles the prosecution's case, piece by piece. If the government can't prove every single element of the charge beyond a reasonable doubt, their whole case can collapse. This means you have to be proactive from the second you find out you're under investigation.

Common Affirmative Defenses to AWOL

Some legal arguments don't just reduce the punishment; they can completely wipe out the charge. These aren't just excuses; they are legally sound reasons why your absence wasn't a crime. A sharp military defense lawyer will dig into the facts of your situation to see if one of these powerful defenses fits.

Key defenses often boil down to:

• Lack of Knowledge: The prosecution has to prove you knew you had to be somewhere at a specific time. If the order was vague, never got to you, or was changed without you being told, you can't be held criminally responsible. A classic example is a last-minute change to a formation time that you never received.
• Impossibility: This defense argues it was physically impossible for you to get back to your duty station, and it wasn't your fault. Think of a sudden car wreck, a freak blizzard canceling all flights, or a medical emergency that left you laid up in a hospital bed. These are all scenarios where returning was simply not an option.
• Duress or Coercion: This is a serious defense where you argue that you were forced to be absent because of a credible, immediate threat of severe harm to you or someone you love. The threat has to be real and overwhelming enough to break a person's will. For instance, being held against your will or facing threats of extreme violence could absolutely form the basis of a duress defense.

A winning defense often comes down to showing that your absence wasn't about defying orders. Instead, it was the result of circumstances you couldn't control or a simple breakdown in military communication.

This flowchart helps visualize the massive difference between a simple AWOL and the much more severe charge of desertion, which is all about your state of mind.

As you can see, the legal game changes entirely based on the service member's intent. This is why the government's job is so much harder in a desertion case compared to a standard ucmj article 86 charge.

Mitigation Strategies That Reduce Punishments

Even if the government proves you were technically AWOL, the battle isn't over. The next phase is mitigation—presenting the why behind your actions to get the punishment reduced. This is your chance to tell your side of the story and give context to what happened. A powerful mitigation case can be the difference between a slap on the wrist and a career-ending court-martial.

Common factors that can lessen the blow include:

1. Family Emergency: A severe illness, a terrible accident, or a death in your immediate family is one of the most compelling mitigating factors. Things like hospital records, death certificates, or texts from your family can prove you were dealing with a real crisis, not just blowing off duty.
2. Mental Health Crisis: If you were struggling with crippling depression, anxiety, PTSD, or another mental health condition, it helps explain why you weren't thinking straight. Medical records, notes from a therapist, and even expert testimony can show that your actions were driven by a health problem that required help.
3. Financial Hardship: Extreme financial stress, like facing eviction or having your car repossessed, can push people to make desperate choices. While it won't erase the charge, explaining the immense pressure you were under can help a commander or a court understand your mindset.
4. Poor Leadership or Command Climate: Sometimes, an absence is a direct reaction to a toxic or abusive command. If you have a documented history of harassment, unfair treatment, or complaints that were ignored, it provides critical context for your actions.

The Critical Role of Preserving Evidence

Your defense begins the moment you go absent. Saving evidence isn't just a good idea; it's everything. Your ability to prove your defense or argue for mitigation hangs entirely on the proof you can show. Without it, your story is just that—a story.

Start collecting this stuff immediately:

• Communications: Save every text, email, and call log with your command, your family, or anyone else involved in your absence.
• Medical Records: Get copies of any doctor’s notes, hospital admission papers, or prescriptions tied to a physical or mental health crisis.
• Financial Documents: Hang on to overdue bills, eviction notices, or loan statements if money problems were the trigger.
• Travel Information: Keep flight itineraries, bus tickets, or car repair bills if a travel nightmare was the reason you were gone.

An experienced defense counsel knows exactly which pieces of evidence matter most and how to weave them into a compelling narrative. They can step in early to protect your rights, tell you what to say (and more importantly, what not to say), and start building the strongest possible defense against an ucmj article 86 charge.

Why You Need an Experienced Civilian Defense Counsel

When you’re under investigation for a UCMJ Article 86 violation, the clock is already ticking. From the moment your absence is flagged, your command and military investigators start building their case against you. In this situation, hiring an experienced civilian military defense attorney isn’t a luxury—it's a critical move to protect your career and your freedom.

Sure, the military will provide you with a detailed lawyer (TDS/ADC/DSO) for free. But let's be blunt: these are often junior officers, buried under massive caseloads, and they still operate within the chain of command. A civilian defense counsel works for one person and one person only: you.

The Advantage of a Dedicated Advocate

That distinction changes everything. A civilian attorney’s entire focus is on getting the best possible result for you, completely free from the institutional pressures and conflicts that can hamstring a detailed military lawyer. They can jump into the fight immediately, often before formal charges are even on the table.

A dedicated counsel gets to work right away:

• Opening a Backchannel to Your Command: A civilian lawyer can establish a professional line of communication with your command, cutting through the noise to figure out what’s really going on and start negotiating from a position of strength.
• Protecting Your Rights: Their first piece of advice is almost always the most important: invoke your right to remain silent. This stops you from accidentally making statements that could destroy your defense later.
• Launching a Counter-Investigation: While the government is building its case, your attorney is building yours. They'll be out there gathering evidence, interviewing friendly witnesses, and tracking down records that tell your side of the story.

Strategic Action From Day One

The goal is always to shut this down at the lowest possible level. The last thing you want is for an AWOL charge to snowball into an NJP or a career-ending court-martial. An expert civilian counsel uses the best legal research tools to dig into every angle of your case, looking for the cracks in the government's argument.

Maybe the order for you to be at your place of duty was never actually communicated clearly. Perhaps there was a legitimate family emergency that you couldn't report in time. A good lawyer uncovers these facts and uses them to build a powerful mitigation package. They can often persuade a command to handle the issue administratively—or even drop it completely.

A civilian attorney isn't just your lawyer; they are your advocate, your shield, and your strategist. They stand between you and the full weight of the military justice system, fighting exclusively to safeguard your future.

Without this kind of dedicated representation, you're essentially walking into a fight alone. The government has prosecutors, investigators, and an entire command structure all working toward one goal: getting a conviction. Hiring an experienced civilian counsel levels the playing field. It is the single most important investment you can make in your military career.

Common Questions About UCMJ Article 86

When you're facing an Article 86 charge, things can get confusing fast. Bad advice and rumors only add to the stress. Let's cut through the noise and get straight to the answers you need.

Can I Be Charged if I Had Verbal Permission to Leave?

Yes, absolutely. This is one of the most common and dangerous misconceptions. Even if your NCO or Officer gave you verbal permission—often called a "VOCO" (verbal order of a commanding officer)—the government can still charge you if your absence isn't officially logged.

It quickly devolves into a classic "he said, she said" situation. If you're in this spot, your first move is to secure proof. Dig up any text messages, find witnesses who overheard the conversation, or note anything that proves you reasonably believed you were authorized to be gone. This is your best defense.

What Happens if I Am Apprehended by Civilian Police?

The moment civilian law enforcement detains you, your unauthorized absence officially stops. From there, local police will verify your military status and start the process of handing you back over to military control.

But here’s the critical part: getting picked up by cops instead of turning yourself in is a major red flag for the command. It's viewed as an aggravating factor, which can lead to much harsher punishments, especially if you were gone for more than 30 days. Once you're returned, expect to be formally processed and charged under Article 86.

You have the right to remain silent. Do not try to explain yourself to civilian police or military authorities. Politely state that you will not answer any questions about your absence until you’ve spoken with a military defense lawyer. Every word you say can, and will, be used to build the case against you.

Will One AWOL Charge Ruin My Entire Career?

Not necessarily. A single, short AWOL doesn’t have to be a career-ender, but the outcome is anything but guaranteed. It all hinges on a few key factors:

• How long were you gone? A few hours is a completely different universe than a few weeks. The punishment scales dramatically with time.
• What does your record look like? If you have a clean slate and a history of solid performance, that gives your defense counsel a lot of leverage to argue for leniency.
• Why were you absent? There's a big difference between going on a bender and rushing home for a documented family emergency. A legitimate reason can make all the difference.
• Who is fighting for you? The skill of your defense attorney is often the deciding factor between a slap on the wrist and a court-martial conviction.

---

An Article 86 investigation is a serious threat to your future. It demands a serious and immediate legal strategy. At Gonzalez & Waddington, we are trial attorneys who defend service members exclusively. We are ready to defend your career. Contact us today for a confidential consultation at https://ucmjdefense.com.