10 U.S.C. § 805
Art. 5. Territorial applicability of this chapter
This chapter applies in all places.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 20
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1959–2024 · leading case: United States v. Wiesen, 56 M.J. 172 (C.A.A.F. 2001).
United States v. Wiesen, 56 M.J. 172 (C.A.A.F. 2001). “See generally Article 5, UCMJ, 10 USC § 805 (the UCMJ applies in territory worldwide).”
United States v. Martinelli, 62 M.J. 52 (C.A.A.F. 2005). “c(4)(c)(i) notes that under clause 3 of Article 134, “[t]here are two types of congressional enactments of local application: specific federal statutes (defining particular crimes), and a 30 Article 5, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 805 (2000). 31 10 U.S.C. § 836 (2000).”
United States v. Ali, 71 M.J. 256 (C.A.A.F. 2012). “” Article 5, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 805 (2006). Because Ali was charged with and convicted of misconduct punishable by Articles 107, 121, and 134 of the UCMJ, the court-martial had jurisdiction over the offenses.”
Rushing, Brandon Gene, 353 S.W.3d 863 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011). “10 U.S.C.A. § 805 (West 2010) (defining UCMJ’s territorial applicability).”
United States v. Loving, 34 M.J. 956 (1992). “§ 802 , are subject thereto in all places under the clear extraterritorial applicability prescribed for the Uniform Code in Article 5 thereof, 10 U.S.C. § 805 . As the Supreme Court of the United States recently held in Kinsella v.”
United States v. Bennett, 12 M.J. 463 (1982). “See Article 5, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 805 ; Legislative History at 897.”
United States v. Black, 1 M.J. 340 (1976). “” Article 5, UCMJ, 10 USC § 805 . However, in the O’Callahan case, the Supreme Court held that conduct in the civilian community by a person subject to the Uniform Code, which constitutes a violation both of the Code and the community's civilian penal code, but which has no…”
United States v. McMurrin, 69 M.J. 591 (N.M.C.C.A. 2010). “5, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 805 (“This chapter applies in all places”).”
United States v. Schafer, 13 C.M.A. 83 (1962). “And neither, of course, can the locus of the crime, nor the penalty therefor, make any difference, for those amenable to military justice under Article 2 of the Code, 10 USC § 802 , are subject thereto in all places under the clear extraterritorial applicability prescribed for…”
Slater Williams v. Robert F. Froehlke, Sec'y of the Army, 490 F.2d 998 (2d Cir. 1974). “” 10 U.S.C. § 805 . 3 There is no doubt of the congressional intention to subject persons by virtue of their status as servicemen to military jurisdiction.”
John W. Burns v. J. C. Taylor, Warden, United States Penitentiary, Leavenworth, Kansas, 274 F.2d 141 (10th Cir. 1959). “And, Article 2 of the Uniform Code, 10 U.S.C. § 802 , provides that all persons who are “members of a regular component of the armed forces * * * ” are subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice; and, Article 5, 10 U.”
Bennett v. Davis, 267 F.2d 15 (10th Cir. 1959). “And, Article 5 of the Code, 10 U.S.C. § 805 , provides that “this code shall be applicable in all places.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.