10 U.S.C. § 820

Art. 20. Jurisdiction of summary courts-martial

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 10 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a)In General.—Subject to section 817 of this title (article 17), summary courts-martial have jurisdiction to try persons subject to this chapter, except officers, cadets, aviation cadets, and midshipmen, for any noncapital offense made punishable by this chapter. No person with respect to whom summary courts-martial have jurisdiction may be brought to trial before a summary court-martial if he objects thereto. If objection to trial by summary court-martial is made by an accused, trial may be ordered by special or general court-martial as may be appropriate. Summary courts-martial may, under such limitations as the President may prescribe, adjudge any punishment not forbidden by this chapter except death, dismissal, dishonorable or bad-conduct discharge, confinement for more than one month, hard-labor without confinement for more than 45 days, restriction to specified limits for more than two months, or forfeiture of more than two-thirds of one month’s pay.(b)Non-criminal Forum.—A summary court-martial is a non-criminal forum. A finding of guilty at a summary court-martial does not constitute a criminal conviction.(Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, 70A Stat. 43; Pub. L. 90–632, § 2(6), Oct. 24, 1968, 82 Stat. 1336; Pub. L. 114–328, div. E, title LIV, § 5164, Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2899.)

Historical and Revision Notes
Revised section	Source (U.S. Code)	Source (Statutes at Large)
820	50:580.	May 5, 1950, ch. 169, § 1 (Art. 20), 64 Stat. 114.

The word “shall” in the first sentence is omitted as surplusage. The word “may” is substituted for the word “shall” in the second sentence. The words “the provisions of” are omitted as surplusage. The word “If” is substituted for the word “Where”. The words “for more than” are substituted for the words “in excess of”. The words “more than” are substituted for the words “pay in excess of”.

Editorial NotesAmendments

2016—Pub. L. 114–328 designated existing provisions as subsec. (a), inserted heading, and added subsec. (b).

1968—Pub. L. 90–632 substituted provisions prohibiting trial by summary court-martial in all cases if the person objects thereto for provisions allowing such trial over the person’s objection if he has previously been offered and has refused article 15 punishment.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 2016 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 114–328 effective on Jan. 1, 2019, as designated by the President, with implementing regulations and provisions relating to applicability to various situations, see section 5542 of Pub. L. 114–328 and Ex. Ord. No. 13825, set out as notes under section 801 of this title.

Effective Date of 1968 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 90–632 effective first day of tenth month following October 1968, see section 4 of Pub. L. 90–632, set out as a note under section 801 of this title.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 54 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1958–2024 · leading case: Middendorf v. Henry, 425 U.S. 25 (1976).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Middendorf v. Henry, 425 U.S. 25 (1976). · cites it 11× “20, UCMJ, 10 U. S. C. § 820 . The presiding officer acts as judge, factfinder, prosecutor, and defense counsel.”

United States v. Mack, 9 M.J. 300 (1980). · cites it 4× “18 Article 20, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 820 . Thus, except for a service member “attached to or embarked in a vessel” and on whom nonju *314 dicial punishment is imposed, an accused has a means to assure that, unless the charges are dismissed, he will be tried by a court-martial —…”

United States v. Booker, 5 M.J. 246 (1978). · cites it 3× “What is at issue is whether the Constitution prohibits Congress from authorizing, as it has by Article 20, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 820 , 1 trial by a summary court-martial of a service-connected offense that would be regarded as serious if tried by a civil court in the civilian…”

Gurson Gourzong v. Attorney Gen. United States, 826 F.3d 132 (3rd Cir. 2016). · cites it 2× “” 10 U.S.C. § 820 . Although summary courts- martial may try persons for any noncapital offenses under the UCMJ, they may not impose “death, dismissal, dishonorable or bad-conduct discharge, confinement for more than one month, hard-labor without confinement for more than 45…”

United States v. Booker, 5 M.J. 238 (1977). “Obviously the Middendorf majority attached great significance to the ceilings on punishments set forth in Article 20, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 820 . Yet, Mr. Justice Rehnquist conceded that, as argued by the dissent, and as, in fact, present in this case,…”

Zellers v. United States, 682 A.2d 1118 (D.C. 1996). · cites it 2× “The summary court-martial under Article 20 ( 10 U.S.C. § 820 ) and non-judicial punishment by a commanding officer under Article 15 ( 10 U.”

Bolton v. Dep't of the Navy Bd. for Corr. of Naval Records, 914 F.3d 401 (6th Cir. 2019). “20, 10 U.S.C. § 820 , and non-judicial punishment, UCMJ art.”

United States v. Matthews, 16 M.J. 354 (1983). “The penalty of death may not be imposed for these offenses by a summary court-martial (Article 20, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 820 ), by a special court-martial (Article 19, UCMJ, 10 U.”

United States v. Washington, 57 M.J. 394 (C.A.A.F. 2002). “One of the six cases was referred to a special court-martial after the accused objected to a summary court-martial under Article 20, UCMJ, 10 USC § 820 , and he subsequently requested and was granted an administrative discharge in lieu of court-martial.”

Daigle v. Warner, 348 F. Supp. 1074 (D. Haw. 1972). · cites it 4× “On June 28, 1972, Daigle appeared before a summary court-martial for alleged failure to obey a lawful order and possessing two I.”

Dumas v. United States, 223 Ct. Cl. 465 (Ct. Cl. 1980). “Article 20, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 820 (1976). Article 15 nonjudicial punishment, UCMJ, 10 U.”

United States v. Kelly, 45 M.J. 259 (C.A.A.F. 1996). “20, UCMJ, 10 USC § 820 . In other words, by careful design, Congress structured the court-martial system to ensure that, with the single exception mentioned earlier, no member of the armed forces may be punished in any way for violating the Uniform Code of Military Justice…”

Show all 54 citing cases →

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.