U.S. Code » Title 10 » Subtitle Subtitle A— General Military Law › Part PART II— PERSONNEL › Chapter CHAPTER 47— UNIFORM CODE OF MILITARY JUSTICE › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER V— COMPOSITION OF COURTS-MARTIAL

10 U.S.C. § 829

Art. 29. Assembly and impaneling of members; detail of new members and military judges

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 10 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a)Assembly.—The military judge shall announce the assembly of a general or special court-martial with members. After such a court-martial is assembled, no member may be absent, unless the member is excused—(1) as a result of a challenge;(2) under subsection (b)(1)(B); or(3) by order of the military judge or the convening authority for disability or other good cause.(b)Impaneling.—(1) Under rules prescribed by the President, the military judge of a general or special court-martial with members shall—(A) after determination of challenges, impanel the court-martial; and(B) excuse the members who, having been assembled, are not impaneled.(2) In a general court-martial, the military judge shall impanel—(A) 12 members in a capital case; and(B) eight members in a noncapital case.(3) In a special court-martial, the military judge shall impanel four members.(c)Alternate Members.—In addition to members under subsection (b), the military judge shall impanel alternate members, if the convening authority authorizes alternate members.(d)Detail of New Members.—(1) If, after members are impaneled, the membership of the court-martial is reduced to—(A) fewer than 12 members with respect to a general court-martial in a capital case;(B) fewer than six members with respect to a general court-martial in a noncapital case; or(C) fewer than four members with respect to a special court-martial;the trial may not proceed unless the convening authority details new members and, from among the members so detailed, the military judge impanels new members sufficient in number to provide the membership specified in paragraph (2).(2) The membership referred to in paragraph (1) is as follows:(A) 12 members with respect to a general court-martial in a capital case.(B) At least six but not more than eight members with respect to a general court-martial in a noncapital case.(C) Four members with respect to a special court-martial.(e)Detail of New Military Judge.—If the military judge is unable to proceed with the trial because of disability or otherwise, a new military judge shall be detailed to the court-martial.(f)Evidence.—(1) In the case of new members under subsection (d), the trial may proceed with the new members present after the evidence previously introduced is read or, in the case of audiotape, videotape, or similar recording, is played, in the presence of the new members, the military judge, the accused, and counsel for both sides.(2) In the case of a new military judge under subsection (e), the trial shall proceed as if no evidence had been introduced, unless the evidence previously introduced is read or, in the case of audiotape, videotape, or similar recording, is played, in the presence of the new military judge, the accused, and counsel for both sides.(Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, 70A Stat. 47; Pub. L. 90–632, § 2(11), Oct. 24, 1968, 82 Stat. 1337; Pub. L. 98–209, § 3(d), Dec. 6, 1983, 97 Stat. 1394; Pub. L. 107–107, div. A, title V, § 582(c), Dec. 28, 2001, 115 Stat. 1124; Pub. L. 114–328, div. E, title LV, § 5187, Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2902.)

Historical and Revision Notes

Revised section

Source (U.S. Code)

Source (Statutes at Large)

829(a)

829(b)

50:593(a).

50:593(b).

May 5, 1950, ch. 169, § 1 (Art. 29), 64 Stat. 117.

829(c)

50:593(c).

In subsections (a), (b), and (c), the word “may” is substituted for the word “shall”.

In subsections (b) and (c), the word “details” is substituted for the word “appoints”, since the filling of the position involved is not appointment to an office in the constitutional sense.

Editorial NotesAmendments

2016—Pub. L. 114–328 amended section generally. Prior to amendment, section related to absent and additional members of a general or special court-martial.

2001—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 107–107 designated existing provisions as par. (1), substituted “the applicable minimum number of members” for “five members” in two places, and added par. (2).

1983—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 98–209 substituted “unless excused as a result of a challenge, excused by the military judge for physical disability or other good cause, or excused by order of the convening authority for good cause” for “except for physical disability or as a result of a challenge or by order of the convening authority for good cause”.

1968—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 90–632, § 2(11)(A), substituted “court has been assembled for the trial of the accused” for “accused has been arraigned”.

Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 90–632, § 2(11)(B), inserted reference to court-martial composed of a military judge alone, struck out reference to oath of members, and inserted provisions requiring that only the evidence which has been introduced before members of the court be read to the court and that all evidence, not merely testimony, be included.

Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 90–632, § 2(11)(C), inserted reference to court-martial composed of a military judge alone, struck out reference to oath of members, and substituted evidence previously introduced for testimony of previously examined witnesses as the body of evidence which the verbatim record must cover.

Subsec. (d) Pub. L. 90–632, § 2(11)(D), added subsec. (d).

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 2001 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 107–107 applicable with respect to offenses committed after Dec. 31, 2002, see section 582(d) of Pub. L. 107–107, set out as a note under section 816 of this title.

Effective Date of 1983 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 98–209 effective first day of eighth calendar month beginning after Dec. 6, 1983, see section 12(a)(1) of Pub. L. 98–209, set out as a note 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 47 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1960–2025 · leading case: United States v. Vazquez, 72 M.J. 13 (C.A.A.F. 2013).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
United States v. Vazquez, 72 M.J. 13 (C.A.A.F. 2013). · cites it 5× “Appellee has not shown that the application of Article 29(b), UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 829 (b) (2006), and R.C.M. 805(d)(1) was unconstitutional as applied to him, and the military judge’s decision to proceed in accordance with the procedure set out by Congress in Article 29(b), UCMJ,…”
United States v. Easton, 71 M.J. 168 (C.A.A.F. 2012). · cites it 2× “For example, the text of Article 29, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 829 (2006), is clearly at odds with the rationale in Crist.”
United States v. Dobson, 63 M.J. 1 (C.A.A.F. 2006). “” Article 29(b), UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 829 (b) (2000). The prohibition against proceeding, however, is subject to the procedure for making and ruling on challenges under Article 41, UCMJ, 10 U.”
United States v. Ryan, 5 M.J. 97 (1978). “, 10 U.S.C. § 829 , in conjunction with Article 25(d)(2), supra, was the basis for the accused’s right to a particular composition of the court at that period in the court-martial proceedings.”
United States v. Jette, 25 M.J. 16 (1987). “29 and 60, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. §§ 829 and 860, respectively. The court below held that Colonel Kimball was not empowered to act as a convening authority in this case because he assumed command of the 3d Combat Support Group in violation of service regulations.”
United States v. Boehm, 17 C.M.A. 530 (1968). · cites it 2× “Reviewing the second trial, the accused contends the record of trial does not indicate that, as required by Article 29 (a), Code, supra, 10 USC § 829 , the convening authority’s excuse of the court member was for good cause.”
United States v. Carter, 25 M.J. 471 (1988). “Indeed, the only codal references to a convening authority’s appointing members if a general or special court-martial is reduced below the required quorum of members appear in Article 29(b) and (c), UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 829 (b) and (c). The former subsection contains this sentence:…”
United States v. Marsh, 21 M.J. 445 (1986). “29(b), UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 829 (b). His criticisms of the procedures used in composing this court-martial are numerous; and we shall address each separately, although we shall also consider their collective effect, if any, on the appearance of fairness in the military justice…”
United States v. Tibbs, 15 C.M.A. 350 (1965). “Article 29, of the Uniform Code, supra, 10 USC § 829 ; United States v Whitley, 5 USCMA 786, 789 , 19 CMR 82 .”
United States v. Colon, 6 M.J. 73 (1978). “Moreover, in order for the waiver to be intelligently as well as voluntarily made, the military judge should delineate to the military accused his derivative rights under Article 29(a), UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 829 (a). In the situation of the appellant’s court-martial, the doctrine of…”
United States v. Miller, 19 M.J. 159 (1985). “Article 29(b), UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 829 (b). If this approach had been taken by the military judge, little doubt would exist as to the fairness of this court-martial.”
United States v. Boysen, 11 C.M.A. 331 (1960). · cites it 2× “Article 29, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 USC § 829 , provides for excusal of court members.”
Show all 47 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.