10 U.S.C. § 880

Art. 80. Attempts

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 10 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) An act, done with specific intent to commit an offense under this chapter, amounting to more than mere preparation and tending, even though failing, to effect its commission, is an attempt to commit that offense.(b) Any person subject to this chapter who attempts to commit any offense punishable by this chapter shall be punished as a court-martial may direct, unless otherwise specifically prescribed.(c) Any person subject to this chapter may be convicted of an attempt to commit an offense although it appears on the trial that the offense was consummated.(Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, 70A Stat. 65.)

Historical and Revision Notes

Revised section

Source (U.S. Code)

Source (Statutes at Large)

880(a)

880(b)

50:674(a).

50:674(b).

May 5, 1950, ch. 169, § 1 (Art. 80), 64 Stat. 134.

880(c)

50:674(c).

In subsection (a), the words “even though” are substituted for the word “but” for clarity.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1,218 cases (143 in the last 5 years), 1957–2026 · leading case: United States v. Wheeler, 76 M.J. 564 (A.F.C.C.A. 2017).
United States v. Wheeler, 76 M.J. 564 (A.F.C.C.A. 2017). · cites it 3× “of a military judge sitting alone, Appellant was convicted, contrary to his pleas, of attempting to commit a lewd act on a person he believed to be a child who had not yet attained the age of 16 years by intentionally communicating indecent language with an intent to arouse or…”
United States v. Sewell, 76 M.J. 14 (C.A.A.F. 2017). · cites it 2× “The MJ dismissed Appellant’s Article 80, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 880 (2012), charge for attempted rape, and the panel found Appellant not guilty of ten other specifi- cations, including indecent exposure, unlawful touching, im- peding an investigation, and communicating threats.”
United States v. Akbar, 74 M.J. 364 (C.A.A.F. 2015). · cites it 2× “Contrary to his pleas, a panel of officer and enlisted court-martial members convicted Appellant of attempted murder (three specifications) and premeditated murder (two specifications), in violation of Articles 80 and 118, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), 10 U.S.C. §§…”
United States v. Mizgala, 61 M.J. 122 (C.A.A.F. 2005). · cites it 2× “ss for lack of a speedy trial 1 Mizgala entered guilty pleas to attempted larceny, unauthorized absence, unauthorized absence terminated by apprehension, two specifications of wrongfully using cocaine, wrongfully using marijuana, larceny of a motor vehicle, and larceny of…”
United States v. Anderson, 55 M.J. 198 (C.A.A.F. 2001). · cites it 2× “In addition, he was acquitted of two specifications alleging that he attempted to rape his daughter, in violation of Article 80, UCMJ, 10 USC § 880 , and one specification alleging that he raped his daughter, in violation of Article 120, UCMJ, 10 USC § 920 , but he was found…”
United States v. Wiesen, 56 M.J. 172 (C.A.A.F. 2001). · cites it 2× “A general court-martial composed of officer and enlisted members convicted appellant, contrary to his pleas, of two specifications of attempted forcible sodomy with a child, indecent acts with a child, and obstruction of justice, in violation of Articles 80 and 134, Uniform Code…”
United States v. Lewis, 63 M.J. 405 (C.A.A.F. 2006). · cites it 2× “He entered guilty pleas to attempted distribution of ecstasy, conspiracy to use and distribute controlled substances, use of ecstasy, use of ketamine, use of LSD, use of methamphetamine, possession of ketamine, possession of ecstasy with the intent to distribute, and…”
United States v. Payne, 73 M.J. 19 (C.A.A.F. 2014). · cites it 2× “by a general court-martial with members of one *21 specification of attempting to communicate indecent language to a child under the age of sixteen, one specification of attempting to transfer obscene material to a minor, and one specification of attempting to persuade a minor…”
United States v. McDonald, 57 M.J. 18 (C.A.A.F. 2002). · cites it 2× “rt-martial of three specifications of attempting to wrongfully buy stolen retail merchandise on April 16, 20, and 21, 1998; two specifications of wrongfully soliciting two different individuals to steal merchandise over a period exceeding two years; and one specification of…”
United States v. Bungert, 62 M.J. 346 (C.A.A.F. 2006). · cites it 2× “Avionics Technician Third Class Christopher Bungert pled guilty to, and was convicted of, using amphetamines and methamphetamines, distributing methamphetamines, attempting to distribute methamphetamines, and one specification of dereliction of duty, in violation of Articles 80,…”
United States v. Redlinski, 58 M.J. 117 (C.A.A.F. 2003). · cites it 2× “distribution of marijuana, wrongful possession of marijuana, wrongful use of marijuana, wrongful use of marijuana while on board a vessel used by the armed forces, wrongful distribution of marijuana, and wrongful distribution of marijuana while on board a vessel used by the…”
Solorio v. United States, 483 U.S. 435 (1987). · cites it 2× “80, 10 U. S. C. § 880 . The specifications alleged to have occurred in Alaska included all of the Article 128 and Article 80 specifications and 7 of the Article 134 specifications.”
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.