10 U.S.C. § 904

Art. 104. Public records offenses

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 10 CasesGoogle Scholar
Any person subject to this chapter who, willfully and unlawfully—(1) alters, conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys a public record; or(2) takes a public record with the intent to alter, conceal, remove, mutilate, obliterate, or destroy the public record;shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.(Added Pub. L. 114–328, div. E, title LX, § 5415, Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2944.)Editorial NotesPrior Provisions

A prior section 904 was renumbered section 903b of this title.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date

Section 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 15 cases, 1957–2020 · leading case: Ali Hamza Ahmad al Bahlul v. United States, 767 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2014).
Ali Hamza Ahmad al Bahlul v. United States, 767 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2014). · cites it 6× “The only offenses then listed by statute were spying and aiding the enemy, 10 U.S.C. §§ 904 , 906 (2000). Because Bahlul was not charged with either of these offenses, the military commission trying him had jurisdiction only over violations triable by military commission under…”
Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 548 U.S. 557 (2006). · cites it 3× “” 10 U. S. C. § 904 . 2 Separate and apart from the offense of joining a contingent of “uncivilized combatants who [are] not.”
Salim Hamdan v. United States, 696 F.3d 1238 (D.C. Cir. 2012). · cites it 6× “§ 904 , which was first codified in the Articles of War of 1806, see WILLIAM WINTHROP, MILITARY LAW AND PRECEDENTS 102-03, 981 (rev. 2d ed. 1920), generally requires breach of a duty of 14 After the Supreme Court’s 2006 decision in Hamdan, Congress enacted a new military…”
United States v. Al Bahlul, 820 F. Supp. 2d 1141 (M.C. 2011). · cites it 2× “, concurring) ("the crime of aiding the enemy may, in circumstances where the accused owes allegiance to the party whose enemy he is alleged to have aided, be triable by military commission pursuant to Article 104 of the UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 904 . Indeed, the Government has charged…”
United States v. Curtis, 32 M.J. 252 (1991). “104 and 106, UCMJ, 10 USC § 904 and 906, respectively; In re Yamashita and Ex Parte Quirin, both supra; Madsden v.”
United States v. Garwood, 20 M.J. 148 (1985). “After a lengthy trial, appellant was convicted of communicating with the enemy and assault on an American prisoner of war, in violation of Articles 104 and 128, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. §§ 904 and 928, respectively. Appellant was sentenced to be discharged…”
Edward S. Dickenson v. Colonel James W. Davis, Commandant, United States Disciplinary Barracks, Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, 245 F.2d 317 (10th Cir. 1957). “* Now 10 U.S.C.A. §§ 904 , 905. 1 . “No enlisted man, lawfully inducted into the military service of the United States, shall be discharged from said service without a certificate of discharge * * *.”
Robert G. Thompson v. John S. Gleason, Jr., Adm'r of Vets. Affairs, 317 F.2d 901 (D.C. Cir. 1962). “107 -108, 133, 138 (now 10 U.S.C. § 904 ). . See dissenting opinion of Judge Fahy in this matter when it was before the three-judge court.”
United States v. Marshall, 18 C.M.A. 426 (1969). “4 Similarly, one who “aids, or attempts *431 to aid” the enemy violates Article 104, Code, supra, 10 USC § 904 ; the model specification for this offense also contains allegation of an overt act.”
United States v. Olson, 7 C.M.A. 460 (1957). “LatimER, Judge: Following his trial by general court-martial, the accused was found guilty of three offenses of aiding the enemy, in violation of Article 104, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 USC § 904 , and false swearing under oath, in violation of Article 134, Uniform…”
United States v. Johnson, 20 C.M.A. 320 (1971). “The record of trial clearly reflects that Agent Baker was aware of facts sufficient to cause one familiar with the Code to suspect the accused of a violation of, or an attempt to violate, *322 Article 104, Code, supra, 10 USC § 904 . 2 Agent Baker testified, in an out-of-court…”
United States v. Garwood, 16 M.J. 863 (1983). “On 5 February 1981, Private First Class Garwood, contrary to his pleas, was convicted by general court-martial, officer members, of aiding enemy forces within prisoner of war camps in the Republic of South Vietnam, in violation of Article 104, Uniform Code of Military Justice ■…”
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.