Article 82 UCMJ – Solicitation

Defending Against Criminal Accusations Based on Words Alone

Under Article 82 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), a service member may face serious criminal charges not for committing a crime, but for allegedly encouraging someone else to commit one. Solicitation is a unique offense in military law—it does not require that the underlying crime ever took place. It does not require that anyone agreed. It does not require that any action followed. The offense begins and ends with the alleged act of advising or persuading someone to break the law. And yet, a conviction can result in years of confinement, dishonorable discharge, and the permanent loss of military status.

If your words are being interpreted as solicitation under Article 82, the consequences can be just as severe as if you had committed the act yourself. These are not symbolic charges. The command may push aggressively for punishment that aligns with the very offense you’re accused of encouraging. If your case is being built on inference, conversation, or assumptions about intent, now is the time to bring in legal counsel with the focus and precision necessary to dismantle it—before speculation becomes sentencing.

What Does Article 82 Criminalize?

Article 82 targets the act of encouraging, advising, or requesting that someone else commit one of four offenses under the UCMJ. These are:

• Desertion (Article 85)
• Mutiny (Article 94)
• Misbehavior before the enemy (Article 99)
• Sedition (also under Article 94)

To secure a conviction under Article 82, the prosecution must prove:

1. That the accused intentionally solicited or advised another person to commit one of the four named offenses;
2. That this solicitation was made with the purpose of having the offense carried out; and
3. That the person being advised either attempted or committed the act (though in some cases, this is not required for the solicitation itself to stand as a separate offense).

What makes this article particularly complex is that it defines solicitation as a complete and punishable offense the moment the advice is given—even if the other person ignores it completely.

What Counts as Solicitation?

Solicitation under Article 82 can occur in many forms. It does not require a formal plan, an agreement, or a secret exchange. It can be a spoken statement, a message, or even conduct that clearly reflects an intent to influence another’s behavior unlawfully. Military courts consider the nature of the interaction, the context of the words, and the surrounding circumstances.

The UCMJ does not require that the person being solicited actually follows through—or even agrees. It also doesn’t matter whether the solicitation was direct or made through intermediaries. If intent and content are established, that may be enough to pursue charges.

Common Scenarios in Article 82 Cases

Article 82 is most frequently applied in high-stakes or politically sensitive cases, such as:

• Suggesting a fellow service member avoid deployment or abandon their post
• Encouraging group resistance to leadership or policy decisions
• Urging a peer to undermine mission orders
• Pushing another service member toward an act of force or rebellion
• Attempting to coordinate disobedience during field operations

It is not uncommon for such cases to hinge on conflicting interpretations of statements, informal conversations, or secondhand testimony. What one person views as venting or joking may be interpreted by another as criminal persuasion.

What Is the Maximum Punishment Under Article 82?

If the solicited crime was actually attempted or committed, the punishment for solicitation generally mirrors that of the offense itself. That means:

• Solicitation to desert: Up to 3 years confinement, dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of pay and allowances
• Solicitation to commit mutiny or sedition: Up to 10 years confinement, dishonorable discharge, total forfeitures
• Solicitation to misbehave before the enemy: Up to 10 years confinement and full punitive separation

Even if the underlying offense is not attempted or carried out, solicitation alone still warrants criminal sentencing under Article 82. The punishment may be slightly reduced but can still result in separation, loss of benefits, and confinement.

What About Other Types of Solicitation?

Soliciting another person to commit a crime that falls outside the four offenses listed in Article 82—such as drug distribution, prostitution, or producing illicit material—is charged separately under Article 134. The act may be the same, but the legal basis and sentencing range differ.

Understanding this distinction is essential. Charging errors, improper classification, or vague wording in the charge sheet can all be contested. A precise and well-organized defense can use these technical issues to your advantage.

Defending Against Article 82 Allegations

A defense against solicitation charges must begin with a clear understanding of context and communication. Joseph Jordan approaches these cases with care, not only reviewing the language that’s being used against you, but also how it was received, when it was spoken, and what the environment around it looked like.

Key defense angles include:

• Absence of Criminal Intent: If the words were said without the goal of having the crime committed, they may be protected speech
• Ambiguity or Misinterpretation: Phrasing, tone, or context may change the meaning of a conversation entirely
• No Substantive Connection to Target Offense: If the solicited offense was vague or never outlined clearly, the Article 82 framework may fall apart
• Lack of Follow-Through: In some cases, absence of any supporting action from others may call the original statement into question
• Overreach in Prosecution: If the act being prosecuted would normally fall under Article 134 or another section, overcharging under Article 82 may be challenged procedurally

Joseph Jordan crafts defenses not from templates—but from evidence, language, and timing. His representation is exact, responsive, and grounded in real-world courtroom dynamics.

Why Joseph Jordan?

Joseph Jordan is a military defense attorney who has spent his legal career standing between service members and life-altering allegations. He understands not just the law, but how military leadership and prosecution build cases from partial statements and assumptions. His job isn’t to apologize for your service—it’s to protect it.

With a focus on serious offenses under the UCMJ, Jordan offers:

• Tailored defense strategies for solicitation and related charges
• Firsthand understanding of Article 82’s legal structure
• Complete transparency from first consultation to resolution
• Relentless advocacy focused on dismantling unfounded accusations

Start Your Defense Now—Before It’s Defined For You

Solicitation charges under Article 82 can escalate quickly. A remark that takes seconds to say can lead to years of fallout if left unchecked. The longer the process moves without a defense, the harder it becomes to shift the outcome.

📞 Call (888) 616-6177 or send a secure message now to schedule a confidential case review.
You don’t need to face this alone—and you shouldn’t.