Article 82 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice criminalizes solicitation—encouraging, advising, ordering, requesting, or enticing another person to commit an offense under the UCMJ. Solicitation can involve anything from encouraging a friend to assault someone during a drunken argument, to asking a roommate to lie for you, to pushing someone toward misconduct through direct or indirect statements.
Solicitation is one of the most misunderstood and misapplied offenses in military law. Commands frequently charge solicitation when a service member makes a sarcastic comment, speaks emotionally during a dispute, or vents frustration in a group chat. Many solicitation cases involve alcohol, confusion, stress, domestic conflict, or misunderstandings rather than any true intent to encourage wrongdoing.
Florida’s bases—including NAS Jacksonville, Mayport, Pensacola, Whiting Field, Eglin, Hurlburt Field, Tyndall, Patrick SFB, MacDill, NSA Panama City, and NAS Key West—see solicitation charges frequently because of the state’s nightlife, young service-member population, alcohol-heavy social life, and tendency for chaotic group situations where statements get exaggerated, misheard, or misinterpreted.
Gonzalez & Waddington is internationally recognized for dismantling solicitation, conspiracy, and “encouragement” charges. We expose government overreach, unreliable witness accounts, lack of intent, joking behavior, intoxication, and emotional communication that prosecutors often twist into alleged criminal encouragement.
A person violates Article 82 if they:
Solicitation does NOT require the other person to act. The crime is complete the moment the accused intentionally encourages unlawful behavior.
However—and this is critical—prosecutors must prove specific intent, not joking, sarcasm, or emotional outbursts.
However, many accusations falsely arise from:
Prosecutors must prove:
The government must show the words reasonably interpreted as encouraging misconduct.
Accidental statements, sarcasm, or confusion do not count.
This is the most important element—and the prosecution often cannot prove it.
Invoking self-defense, trying to calm someone down, or expressing emotion is not wrongful solicitation.
Solicitation requires encouraging someone else. Conspiracy requires an agreement and an overt act. Solicitation can exist even with NO agreement.
Principals participate in the offense; solicitation occurs before the offense.
Solicitation encourages misconduct; obstruction interferes with an investigation.
Solicitation is punished according to the severity of the solicited offense, with limitations:
The sentencing exposure is substantial, especially in sexual assault, robbery, and violent-offense cases.
Florida’s military environment generates many solicitation accusations because of:
Most Florida solicitation cases stem from drunken misunderstandings, emotional expression, or joking—not criminal encouragement.
Extremely common in Florida nightlife districts.
Emotional statements like “don’t tell anyone” may be misinterpreted.
Jokes or trash talk become “solicitation” when taken out of context.
Statements meant to protect someone emotionally—not to obstruct—get twisted by prosecutors.
Commands sometimes interpret de-escalation attempts incorrectly.
Statements not meant seriously are treated as criminal intent.
Commands overreact to venting among friends.
Often misinterpreted as encouraging misconduct or obstruction.
Group chats or messages that appear to “support” acts are taken out of context.
Sometimes misinterpreted as urging assault.
Agencies involved include:
We show the accused did NOT intend for the crime to be committed. Without intent, solicitation fails.
Alcohol, memory gaps, and bias often undermine accusers.
We analyze full text threads, metadata, timestamps, and surrounding messages to disprove “solicitation.”
Words must be intended as encouragement—not accidental or emotional.
No. Sarcasm, venting, or joking is not solicitation unless the government can prove you intended someone to actually commit a crime—an extremely high burden.
Yes, but out-of-context messages are often misleading. We use full-thread analysis, metadata, and digital reconstruction to destroy false solicitation allegations.
Alcohol severely weakens the intent requirement. Drunken statements rarely satisfy the specific intent needed for Article 82.
No. Solicitation is complete once the statement is made with intent—regardless of outcome. But this also makes intent extremely hard for prosecutors to prove.
We are globally recognized UCMJ defense lawyers with decades of success defeating solicitation, conspiracy, and multi-party allegations. Our digital forensics, witness cross-examination, and narrative strategies routinely dismantle Article 82 cases.
Article 82 solicitation is dangerously broad and commonly abused—especially in Florida’s nightlife, barracks, and group social environments. Most cases stem from jokes, emotion, alcohol, misunderstanding, or misinterpretation—not true criminal encouragement. When defended properly, these cases are highly winnable.
Your silence protects you. Your lawyer defends you. Your strategy saves your career.
