10 U.S.C. § 823

Art. 23. Who may convene special courts-martial

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

(a) Special courts-martial may be convened by—(1) any person who may convene a general court-martial;(2) the commanding officer of a district, garrison, fort, camp, station, Air Force or Space Force military installation, auxiliary air field, or other place where members of the Army, the Air Force, or the Space Force are on duty;(3) the commanding officer of a brigade, regiment, detached battalion, or corresponding unit of the Army;(4) the commanding officer of a wing, group, or separate squadron of the Air Force or a corresponding unit of the Space Force;(5) the commanding officer of any naval or Coast Guard vessel, shipyard, base, or station; the commanding officer of any Marine brigade, regiment, detached battalion, or corresponding unit; the commanding officer of any Marine barracks, wing, group, separate squadron, station, base, auxiliary air field, or other place where members of the Marine Corps are on duty;(6) the commanding officer of any separate or detached command or group of detached units of any of the armed forces placed under a single commander for this purpose; or(7) the commanding officer or officer in charge of any other command when empowered by the Secretary concerned.(b)(1) If any such officer is an accuser, the court shall be convened by superior competent authority, and may in any case be convened by such authority if considered advisable by him.(2) A commanding officer shall not be considered an accuser solely due to the role of the commanding officer in convening a special court-martial to which charges and specifications were referred by a special trial counsel in accordance with this chapter.(Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, 70A Stat. 44; Pub. L. 116–283, div. A, title IX, § 924(b)(21)(B), Jan. 1, 2021, 134 Stat. 3824; Pub. L. 117–81, div. A, title V, § 534(b), title X, § 1081(a)(13), Dec. 27, 2021, 135 Stat. 1696, 1920.)

Historical and Revision Notes
823(a) 823(b)	50:587(a). 50:587(b).	May 5, 1950, ch. 169, § 1 (Art. 23), 64 Stat. 115.

Historical and Revision Notes

823(a)

823(b)

50:587(a).

50:587(b).

May 5, 1950, ch. 169, § 1 (Art. 23), 64 Stat. 115.

In subsection (a)(7), the words “Secretary concerned” are substituted for the words “Secretary of a Department”.

In subsection (b), the word “If” is substituted for the word “When”. The words “if considered” are substituted for the words “when deemed”.

Editorial NotesAmendments

2021—Subsec. (a)(2). Pub. L. 117–81, § 1081(a)(13), inserted comma after “Army”.

Pub. L. 116–283, § 924(b)(21)(B)(i), substituted “Air Force or Space Force military installation” for “Air Force base” and “the Air Force, or the Space Force” for “or the Air Force”.

Subsec. (a)(4). Pub. L. 116–283, § 924(b)(21)(B)(ii), inserted “or a corresponding unit of the Space Force” after “Air Force”.

Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 117–81, § 534(b), designated existing provisions as par. (1) and added par. (2).

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 2021 Amendment

Amendment by section 534(b) of Pub. L. 117–81 effective on the date that is two years after Dec. 27, 2021, and applicable with respect to offenses that occur after that date, with provisions for delayed effect and applicability if regulations are not prescribed by the President before the date that is two years after Dec. 27, 2021, see section 539C of Pub. L. 117–81, set out as a note under section 801 of this title.

Transfer of Functions

For transfer of authorities, functions, personnel, and assets of the Coast Guard, including the authorities and functions of the Secretary of Transportation relating thereto, to the Department of Homeland Security, and for treatment of related references, see sections 468(b), 551(d), 552(d), and 557 of Title 6, Domestic Security, and the Department of Homeland Security Reorganization Plan of November 25, 2002, as modified, set out as a note under section 542 of Title 6.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 65 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1958–2022 · leading case: Richard E. Brown, on Behalf of Himself & All Others Similarly Situated v. United States of Am., Richard E. Brown & David l.taylor, 508 F.2d 618 (3rd Cir. 1975).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Richard E. Brown, on Behalf of Himself & All Others Similarly Situated v. United States of Am., Richard E. Brown & David l.taylor, 508 F.2d 618 (3rd Cir. 1975). · cites it 6× “JAMES HUNTER, III, Circuit Judge: This is a class action brought by individuals who were convicted by special courts-martial that were convened by officers in the United States Navy and Marine Corps under what the United States Court of Military Appeals subsequently held was an…”

United States v. Wiesen, 57 M.J. 48 (C.A.A.F. 2002). · cites it 2× “23(a)(3), UCMJ, 10 USC § 823 (a)(3). Based on the size of 9 United States v.”

United States v. Blaylock, 15 M.J. 190 (1983). · cites it 2× “Likewise, in the case at bar, we hold that, since General Palmer, the officer exercising general court-martial jurisdiction, was empowered by Article 23(a)(1), UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 823 (a)(1), to convene special courts-martial, no “jurisdictional” error existed — even if he…”

Brown v. United States, 365 F. Supp. 328 (E.D. Pa. 1973). · cites it 5× “This special court-martial was ostensibly convened pursuant to the authority of 10 U.S.C. § 823 (a)(7) which grants special courts-martial convening authority to “the commanding officer or officer in charge of any .”

United States v. Jette, 25 M.J. 16 (1987). “We hold that Colonel Kimball was authorized by Article 23(a)(4), UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 823 (a)(4), to act as a convening authority *17 in this case.”

United States v. Jeter, 35 M.J. 442 (1992). “23(b), UCMJ, 10 USC § 823 (b) (applies a similar provision to special courts-martial).”

United States v. Hardy, 4 M.J. 20 (1977). “So, our inquiry narrows to whether the general court-martial convening authority had the power to order his subordinate to withdraw a case from an inferior court-martial to which that subordinate had already referred it through a valid exercise of the latter’s authority under…”

United States v. Yates, 28 M.J. 60 (1989). “23(a)(7), UCMJ, 10 USC § 823 (a)(7). True, the convening authority’s power in this case is based on a similar statutory provision, Art.”

United States v. Caputo, 18 M.J. 259 (1984). “I therefore can only record my own doubts and misgivings and strongly urge Congress to clarify its intentions in this highly significant area of military law.”

United States v. Ortiz, 16 C.M.A. 127 (1966). · cites it 2× “the Commanding Officer, 2d Bridge Company, Force Troops, Fleet Marine Force, Atlantic, did not possess the inherent authority under Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 23, 10 USC § 823 , to appoint a special court-martial, nor had the Secretary of the Navy authorized him,…”

United States v. Voorhees, 50 M.J. 494 (C.A.A.F. 1999). “Article 23, UCMJ, 10 USC § 823 , delineates those commanding officers or officers in charge who are authorized to convene a special court-martial.”

United States v. Ridley, 22 M.J. 43 (1986). “ARY REVIEW CORRECT IN CONCLUDING THAT APPELLANT’S SPECIAL COURT-MARTIAL LACKED JURISDICTION BECAUSE THE CONVENING AUTHORITY WAS JUNIOR IN RANK TO THE ACCUSER WHERE THE ACCUSER, WHO HAD NO AUTHORITY TO CONVENE COURTS-MARTIAL, COMMANDED A SUBORDINATE UNIT ATTACHED TO THE CONVENING…”

Show all 65 citing cases →

— 10 U.S.C. § 823(b) — 1 case

United States v. Gilfilen, 6 M.J. 699 (1978).

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.