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 X— PUNITIVE ARTICLES

10 U.S.C. § 887a

Art. 87a. Resistance, flight, breach of arrest, and escape

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 10 CasesGoogle Scholar
Any person subject to this chapter who—(1) resists apprehension;(2) flees from apprehension;(3) breaks arrest; or(4) escapes from custody or confinement;shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.(Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, 70A Stat. 69, § 895; Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title XI, § 1112(a), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 461; renumbered § 887a, Pub. L. 114–328, div. E, title LX, § 5401(2), Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2938.)

Historical and Revision Notes

Revised section

Source (U.S. Code)

Source (Statutes at Large)

895

50:689.

May 5, 1950, ch. 169, § 1 (Art. 95), 64 Stat. 136.

Editorial NotesAmendments

2016—Pub. L. 114–328 renumbered section 895 of this title as this section.

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.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases (10 in the last 5 years), 2022–2026 · leading case: United States v. BAUTISTA (N.M.C.C.A. 2024).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
United States v. BAUTISTA (N.M.C.C.A. 2024). · cites it 2× “4 10 U.S.C. § 887a. 5 10 U.S.C. § 908 . 6 10 U.”
United States v. Bousman (A.F.C.C.A. 2023). “rehension, one specification of failure to obey a lawful order, one specification of control- ling a motor vehicle while drunk, one specification of wrongfully using provok- ing language, one specification of assault with a dangerous weapon, and three specifications of simple…”
United States v. Injerd (A.F.C.C.A. 2022). “2 Consistent with Appellant’s pleas, he was acquitted of one specification each of fleeing apprehension and assaulting a superior noncommissioned officer, in violation of Arti- cles 87a and 91, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. §§ 887a, 891. 3 The military judge ordered that Appellant receive 304…”
United States v. Dolehanty (A.F.C.C.A. 2024). “ACM 40510 Appellant of one specification of flight from apprehension, in violation of Article 87a, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), 10 U.S.C. § 887a,1 and one specification of willfully disobeying a lawful command of a superior officer, in violation of Article 90, UCMJ,…”
United States v. YUCIS (N.M.C.C.A. 2025). “202300044 Modified Entry of Judgment Charge V: Violation of Article 87a, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 887a. Plea: Guilty. Finding: Guilty.”
United States v. TAPER (N.M.C.C.A. 2025). “Additional Charge II: Violation of Article 87a, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 887a. Plea: Not Guilty. Finding: Withdrawn and dismissed.”
United States v. Ziesche (A.F.C.C.A. 2025). “§ 886 ; one specification of resisting apprehension, in violation of Article 87a, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 887a; one specification of breach of restriction, in violation of Article 87b, UCMJ, 10 U.”
United States v. Ziesche (A.F.C.C.A. 2025). “§ 886 ; one specification of resisting apprehension, in violation of Article 87a, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 887a; one specification of breach of restriction, in violation of Article 87b, UCMJ, 10 U.”
United States v. Staff Sergeant OSMIN BONILLA-CARDENAS (A.C.C.A. 2025). “g as a general court-martial, convicted the appellant, pursuant to his pleas, of one specification of resisting apprehension, one specification of assault upon a person in the execution of law enforcement duties, BONILLA-CARDENAS —- ARMY 20230483 and one specification of drunk…”
United States v. Monroe (A.F.C.C.A. 2026). “3 The military judge acquitted Appellant of one specification of failing to go to her pre- scribed appointed place duty, in violation of Article 86, UCMJ, and one specification of fleeing apprehension, in violation of Article 87a, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 887a. United States v. Monroe,…”
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.