What are your Article 31 UCMJ rights?

1. No one subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice may compel any person to incriminate himself or to answer any question the answer that may tend to incriminate him.

2. No person subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice may interrogate, or request any statement from a person suspected of an offense without first informing him of the nature of the accusation, that he does not have to made a statement regarding the offense, and that any statement may be used against him as evidence in a trial by court-martial.

If you are suspected of a crime, you have the following rights:

    • To be told what criminal act you are suspected or accused of doing.
    • To be told that you have the right to remain silent.
  • To be told that any statements you do make (oral or written) could be used against you.

That's Article 31, UCMJ, plain and simple. Note - you should not talk to the command or to investigators without first talking to an attorney.

If the command or investigators (CID, AFOSI, NCIS, etc.) try to speak with you: Say:

"I do not waive my right to remain silent; I want to stop this interview; I want to talk to a lawyer; I want to leave."

They may still try to get you to stay and engage in "chit-chat" or "background information." Say:

"I do not waive my right to silence; I want to stop this interview; I want to talk to a lawyer; I want to leave."

Under no circumstances should you make an oral or written statement. If you say anything at all it could be used against you. It doesn't matter if you "only say" something and then decline to put it in writing or sign the investigators written statement. What you say can be used. Even if you say nothing more than "I didn't do it" they can charge you with making a false official statement.

If you say anything to a friend, supervisor, or other non-law enforcement person, that statement might be used against you. This area of military law can be confusing so the best course of action is to say and do nothing to anyone but your attorney.

Investigators are not your friend. They are there to get you to convict yourself or lead them to evidence that will help convict you. They have been trained on how to appear to be your friend and in other psychological techniques. Frequently, clients will tell us that they simply told the investigator what they wanted to hear, in order to leave. Do not do this. Do not speak to them at all without an attorney present.

If you are in custody or in a situation where you are not free to leave, then you have the additional right to speak with an attorney.

Say: "I want to stop this interview."

Say: "I want to talk to a lawyer."

Say: "I want to leave."

If, despite the advice above you do decide to talk, understand that the law does not give you the right to lie. If you do make a statement which is false it is possible you will be prosecuted for making a false official statement, false swearing, or obstruction of justice. Therefore, the best course of action is to say nothing at all without an attorney present.

William E. Cassara- Military Law Attorney

Recent Accomplishments

Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces Reverses Navy-Marine Corps Court on Hazing Case

By William Cassara | May 14, 2021

The Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF) recently published its opinion in United States v. Mader reversing a Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals decision in a case involving an NCO’s charged hazing of junior Marines. A Sergeant with 3rd Battalion, 3rd Marines was executing orders out of […]

Read More
air force drug conviction

CAAF Reverses Army Court on Hearsay Ruling

By William Cassara | April 30, 2021

In June 2020, the Army Court of Criminal Appeals issued an opinion in United States v. Henry affirming the military judge’s decision to exclude four hearsay statements made by the alleged victim and her son. We discussed that opinion here. The government appealed the Army Court decision to the Court […]

Read More
William E. Cassara, Military Law Attorney

Army Court Reverses Conviction – ACCA Opinion U.S. v. Hannah

By William Cassara | April 24, 2021

We are thrilled to report that the Army Court of Criminal Appeals set aside and dismissed our client’s convictions for two specifications of sexual assault.  We argued that the military judge improperly created the appearance of bias in favor of the government because of her inappropriate conduct toward our client’s […]

Read More
Scroll to Top