Fill in blank numbers of pertinent charges and specifications or "all specifications and charges," as may be appropriate for use unless departmental regulations prevent such election (MCM, 321(2)). THE ACCUSED HAS BEEN PERMITTED AND HAS ELECTED TO REFUSE PUNISHMENT UNDER ARTICLE 15 AS TO YES 1. WAS THE ACCUSED ADVISED IN ACCORDANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 79₫, MCM ? When an accused has been permitted and has elected to refuse punishment under Article 15, trial by summary court-martial may proceed despite his objection. 2. THE ACCUSED, HAVING REFUSED TO CONSENT IN WRITING TO TRIAL BY SUMMARY COURT-MARTIAL AND NOT HAVING BEEN PERMITTED TO REFUSE PUNISHMENT UNDER ARTICLE 15, THE CHARGES ARE HEREWITH RETURNED TO THE CONVENING AUTHOR NAME, GRADE, ORGANIZATION, AND ARMED FORCE OF SUMMARY COURT OFFICER (MCM, 1) Enter after signature, "Only officer present with command', if such is the case. ORGANIZATION DATE SENTENCE ADJUDGED SIGNATURE NOTE: ummary of evidence, if required by the convening or higher authority, will be attached on separate pages. Appendix 6 FORMS FOR CHARGES AND SPECIFICATIONS a. INSTRUCTIONS. 1. Use of forms. These forms are to be used in drafting charges and specifications, not only for the offenses specifically provided for, but as they may be adapted to like offenses. The suggested forms do not as a matter of law exclude other methods of alleging the same offenses, but the appropriate form listed with a punitive article setting forth a specific offense is prescribed for use, when properly completed, as a sufficient allegation of that offense. Except to fill in the blanks with the information required, such a form should not ordinarily be added to or deviated from. As to general principles of drafting specifications when an offense is not provided for herein, see 28. 2. Abbreviations. Dates and times should be written in Arabic numerals, and the designation of organization or command may include Roman or Arabic numerals and the abbreviations "U.S." and "USS." Otherwise, abbreviations should not be used in specifications. 3. Numbering of charges and specifications. When there is more than one charge, the charges should be numbered, using the Roman numerals I, II, etc. When there is more than one specification under a charge, the specifications under that charge should be numbered, using the Arabic numerals 1, 2, etc. Additional charges (246) are numbered in the same manner as the original charge; a single added charge is designated simply "Additional Charge," but if more than one, they are numbered Additional Charge I, Additional Charge II, etc. Specifications under additional charges are designated as prescribed above. The term "Additional" is not used in connection with the specifications. 4. Name and description of the accused. The name of the accused as stated in the specification should include his first name, middle name or initial, and, except in a case in which the jurisdiction of the court over the person is not dependent upon his being a person subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice (e.g., see Arts. 104, 106), should be accompanied by such descriptive language of rank, grade, armed force, organization, or position as will show that he is a person subject to the code, and therefore subject to the jurisdiction of the court as to persons. The service number of the accused is not alleged in the specification. In the ordinary case of an enlisted member, for example, the specification would read, "In that Private John J. Smith, U.S. Army, Company A, 1st Battalion, 7th Infantry, did," etc.; or "In that Yeoman Third Class James P. Jones, U.S. Navy, USS did," etc.; or "In that Airman First Class Harold L. Brown, U.S. Air Force, Headquarters Section, 402d Bombardment Group, did," etc. A person on active duty belonging to a reserve component of the Navy, Marine Corps, or Coast Guard should be described as such; for example, "In that Lieutenant Charles L. White, U.S. Naval Reserve, USS on active duty, did," etc. In the case of persons subject to the code under Article 2, subsections (3) through (12), or subject to trial by court-martial under Article 3 or 4, a description of the accused's position or status which will indicate the basis of jurisdiction of a court-martial should be averred; e.g., John Jones, (Captain, U.S. Air Force Reserve, on inactive duty training authorized by written orders which were voluntarily accepted by him, which orders specified he was subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice) (a person in custody of serving a sentence imposed by a court-martial) (a member of the Public Health Service assigned to and serving with -) (a person within an area under -) (a person convicted of having obtained a fraudulent discharge) (a former major, U.S. Army, who was dismissed by order of the President and has made a written application for trial by court-martial), etc. the control of the Secretary of 5. Use of aliases. If the accused is known by more than one name, as when without discharge a person enlists two or more times, each time under a different name, he should be charged under the name he admits to be his true name. If there be no such admission, he should be charged under the name, etc., pertaining to his first unterminated enlistment with the other names, under aliases; thus, "Private John P. Smith, U.S. Army, Company B, 2d Battalion, 7th Infantry, alias Seaman John Brown, U.S. Coast Guard." 6. In case of change of rank or grade. When the rank or grade of the accused has changed since the date of an alleged offense, the accused should be designated by his present grade followed by a statement of his grade at the date of the alleged offense; thus, "In that Seaman A B, U.S. Navy, then gunner's mate third class, U.S. Navy did,” etc. 7. Time and place of offense. The time and place of the commission of the offense charged should be stated in the specification with sufficient precision to identify the offense and enable the accused to understand what particular act or omission he is called upon to defend. It is proper pleading to allege in a specification that a certain offense occurred "on or about" a certain day, "at or near" a certain place, or, if it is necessary to be more explicit as to the time, "at or about" a certain hour, using a 24-hour clock, e.g., “at or about 2300 hours." These phrases are to be construed reasonably in the light of the circumstances of each particular case. When the act (or acts) specified extends over a considerable period of time it is proper to allege it (or them) as having occurred, for example, "from about 15 June 1967 to about 4 November 1967." So, also, it is proper to allege that an offense was committed while "enroute" between certain points. 8. Form of specification in joint offense. In the case of a joint offense (26d) each accused may be charged separately as if he alone was concerned or all may be charged jointly, that is, in a single specification, in accordance with the principles of the following examples, depending on the decision of the person preferring the charges as to how the persons concerned should be tried. If A and B are joint perpetrators of an offense and it is intended to charge and try both at the same trial, they should be charged in a single specification as follows: "In that (A) and (B), acting jointly and in pursuance of a common intent, did (here allege place, time, and offense)." If it is intended that B shall be tried alone, he may be charged in the same manner as if he had committed the offense by himself. However, if it is desirable to show in the specification that A was a joint actor with him, even though A is not to be tried with B, B may be charged as follows: “In that (B) did, in conjunction with (A), (here allege place, time, and offense)." Note that when several persons are to be tried in a common trial, as distinguished from a joint trial, each is charged separately on individual charge sheets (26d; 331). 9. Principals. When a person has not himself directly committed an offense, but is liable for its commission as a principal under Article 77, he may be charged as though he himself had committed the acts which constitute the offense. 10. Person against whom offense committed. In the case of an offense against the person or property of a person, the first name and surname of that person should be stated, if known. Military rank or grade should be alleged if important to the offense, as in an allegation of disobedience of the command of a superior officer; or if the person has no military position, it may otherwise be necessary to allege his status, as in an allegation of using provoking words towards a person subject to the code (see Art. 117). Address, station, or military organization of the person against whom the offense was committed need not ordinarily be alleged. If the name of the person against whom the offense was committed is not known, he may be described as "a person whose name is unknown." 11. Value. When the value of property or other amount is material with respect to the amount of punishment which may be adjudged upon conviction of an offense, the value or amount should be alleged, for in such a case increased punishments that are contingent upon value may not be adjudged unless there is an allegation, as well as proof, of a value which will support the punishment. See, for a discussion of value, 200 a(7) (Larceny). If several articles of different kinds are the subject of the offense, the value of each article should be stated, followed by a statement of the aggregate value. An example of proper pleading in this respect would be that the accused stole "one shirt, value of about $ one pair of shoes, value of about $. -; and one blanket, value of about $ ; of a total value of about $ ." The value should be stated as "value $2.08" if known exactly; or "value of about $5.00" if not so exactly known, as in the case of used items of property. These principles apply equally to allegations of amount. 12. Law of war. In the case of a person subject to trial by general court-martial by the law of war (see Art. 18), the Charge should be: "Violation of the Law of War"; or "Violation of ‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒," referring to the local penal law of the occupied territory. See 14. However, the erroneous designation of an article of the Uniform Code of Military Justice in such a case does not affect the jurisdiction of the court. 13. Descriptions. In describing property generic terms should be used and details not necessary to a statement of the elements of the offense should be omitted. For example, in alleging property stolen, damaged or destroyed, the property should be described as "a radio," "an automobile," "a watch," and descriptive details such as make, model, color, and serial number should be omitted. In alleging weapons used in offenses of violence, the weapon should be described as "a knife," "a pistol," or "a rifle," without adding other unnecessary descriptive words. Details necessary to complete the offense must, however, be alleged; for example, if possession of only certain types of knives is prohibited by a general regulation, the critical characteristic must be included in alleging a violation (e.g., "a knife with a blade more than 3 inches long"). 14. Documents. Where documents must be alleged, as in the case of regulations and written orders allegedly violated (Art. 92(1) and (2)), bad checks (Arts. 123a and 134), and documents wrongfully possessed or used (Art. 134), the document may be set forth word for word or it may be described, in which case the description must be sufficient to permit the accused to be fully aware of the offense charged. For action where the accused claims that he has not been adequately informed of the offense charged, see 69b. In dealing with checks and other brief documents, word for word pleading is usually preferable. When regulations and other directives are alleged by description, care must be used to correctly identify the document and the precise portion or portions allegedly violated. b. SPECIMEN CHARGES. Charge I: Violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 83. Specification: In that Private Richard Roe, U.S. Army, Company A, 2d Battalion, 2d Infantry, alias Private John Doe, U.S. Army, Company B, 1st Battalion, 29th Infantry, did under the name of John Doe, at Fort Jay, New York, on or about 24 October 1967, by means of deliberate concealment of the fact that he was then a private in said Company A, 2d Battalion, 2d Infantry, procure himself to be enlisted as a private in the Army and did thereafter at Fort Jay, New York, receive allowances under the enlistment so procured. Charge II: Violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 85. Specification: In that Private Richard Roe, U.S. Army, Company A, 2d Battalion, 2d Infantry, alias Private John Doe, U.S. Army, Company B, 1st Battalion, 29th Infantry, did, on or about 6 June 1967, without authority and with intent to remain away therefrom permanently, absent himself from his organization, to wit: Company A, 2d Battalion, 2d Infantry, and did remain so absent in desertion until he was apprehended on or about 4 November 1967. Charge III: Violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 134. Specification 1: In that Private Richard Roe, U.S. Army, Company A, 2d Battalion, 2d Infantry, alias Private John Doe, U.S. Army, Company B, 1st Battalion, 29th Infantry, was, at Chicago, Illinois, on or about 5 June 1967, drunk and disorderly in uniform in a public place, to wit: Joe's Tavern, located at 935 Blank Street in said city. Specification 2: In that Private Richard Roe, U.S. Army, Company A, 2d Battalion, 2d Infantry, alias Private John Doe, U.S. Army, Company B, 1st Battalion, 29th Infantry, did, at Fort Sheridan, Illinois, on or about 5 June 1967, wrongfully and willfully discharge a firearm, to wit: a carbine, in the day room of Company A, 2d Battalion, 2d Infantry, under circumstances such as to endanger human life. on or about 19, in punishable by the Uniform Code of Military Justice, to wit: did, (at) (on board) 4. In that or about Fraudulent enlistment or appointment ARTICLE 82 did, (at)' (on board) 19. on by (here state the manner and form of solicitation or advice), (solicit) (advise) (and -) to (desert in violation of Article 85) (mutiny in violation of Article 94),* [and, as a result of such (solicitation) (advice), the offense (solicited) (advised) was, on or about 19, (at) (on board) (attempted) (committed)' by -)]. (and *If the offense solicited or advised is not attempted or committed, omit the words contained in brackets. 5. In that about 19, by (here state the manner and form of solicita- to commit (an act of misbehavior before the enemy in violation of Article *If the offense solicited or advised is not committed, omit the words contained in brackets. ARTICLE 83 did, (at) (on board) on or 6. In that about 19, by means of [knowingly false representations that (here state the fact or facts material to qualification for enlistment or appointment which were represented), when in fact (here state the true fact or facts)] [deliberate concealment of the fact that (here state the fact or facts disqualifying the accused for enlistment or appointment which were |