Military Attempts, Conspiracy and Solicitation Cases – Military Defense Lawyer

Military Attempts, Conspiracy, and Solicitation Cases Can be Very Serious and Can Threaten Your Military Career and Future.

When military members are accused of inchoate offenses, or offenses such as attempt, conspiracy, solicitation and other related offenses, they can face a variety of military adverse actions and disciplinary actions, to include court-martial trial. If you are a military member facing these allegations, you need a strong military defense lawyer as your advocate. Attorney Richard V. Stevens is a civilian court-martial defense lawyer and military defense lawyer. He began handling military cases in 1995 and he has been handling military cases for over 30 years. Attorney Stevens, and the military defense law firm he founded, are here to provide you with the zealous defense you are seeking to protect you from the potential consequences of these military criminal allegations.

Accessory After the Fact Military Cases (UCMJ Article 78)

Military accessory after the fact allegations are charged under Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 78. This military offense covers the following:

A military member who knowing that an offense punishable by this chapter has been committed, receives, comforts, or assists the offender in order to hinder or prevent his apprehension, trial, or punishment. The assistance given to the principal who committed the primary offense by the military member as an accessory after the fact is not limited to assistance designed to effect the escape or concealment of the principal, but also includes acts performed to conceal the commission of the offense by the principal (for example, by concealing evidence of the offense). The mere failure to report a known offense will not make a military member an accessory after the fact. Such failure may violate a general order or regulation, however, and thus constitute that type of offense under UCMJ Article 92. If the primary offense involved is a serious offense, and the accused military member does anything to conceal it, failure to report it may also constitute the offense of misprision of a serious offense, under UCMJ Article 131c.

Military Attempt Cases (UCMJ Article 80)

Military attempt allegations are charged under Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 80. This military offense covers the following:

An act performed by a military member that is done with specific intent to commit an offense under this chapter, amounting to more than mere preparation and tending, even though failing to effect its commission, is an attempt to commit that offense.

To constitute an attempt there must be a specific intent to commit the offense accompanied by an overt act which directly tends to accomplish the unlawful purpose. One of the primary issues with an alleged attempt is whether or not the act is “more than mere preparation.” Preparation consists of devising or arranging the means or measures necessary for the commission of the offense. The overt act required goes beyond preparatory steps and is a direct movement toward the commission of the offense. For example, a purchase of matches with the intent to burn a haystack is not an attempt to commit arson, but it is an attempt to commit arson to apply a burning match to a haystack, even if no fire results.

Furthermore, the overt act need not be the last act essential to the consummation of the offense. For example, an accused could commit an overt act, and then voluntarily decide not to go through with the intended offense. An attempt would nevertheless have been committed, for the combination of a specific intent to commit an offense, plus the commission of an overt act directly tending to accomplish it, constitutes the offense of attempt. Failure to complete the offense, whatever the cause, is not a defense.

Factual impossibility. A military member who purposely engages in conduct which would constitute the offense if the attendant circumstances were as that person believed them to be is guilty of an attempt. For example, if person A, without justification or excuse and with intent to kill person B, points a gun at person B and pulls the trigger,…then person A is guilty of attempt to murder, even though, unknown to person A, the gun is defective and will not fire.

Similarly, a military member who reaches into another person’s pocket with the intent to steal that person’s billfold is guilty of an attempt to commit larceny, even though the person’s pocket is actually empty.

Voluntary abandonment. It is a defense to an alleged attempt offense that the accused military member voluntarily and completely abandoned the intended crime, solely because of the accused military member’s own sense that it was wrong, prior to the completion of the crime. The voluntary abandonment defense is not allowed if the abandonment results, in whole or in part, from other reasons, for example, the accused military member feared detection or apprehension, decided to await a better opportunity for success, was unable to complete the crime, or
encountered unanticipated difficulties or unexpected resistance. An accused military member who is entitled to the defense of voluntary abandonment may nonetheless be guilty of a lesser included, completed offense. For example, a military member who voluntarily abandoned an attempted armed robbery may nonetheless be guilty of assault with a dangerous weapon – depending on the circumstances of the case.

Military Conspiracy Cases (UCMJ Article 81)

Military conspiracy allegations are charged under Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 81. This military offense covers the following:

A military member who conspires with any other person to commit an offense under this chapter shall, if one or more of the conspirators does an act to effect the object of the conspiracy. In addition, a military member who conspires with any other person to commit an offense under the law of war, and who knowingly does an overt act to effect the object of the conspiracy, shall be punished, if death results to one or more of the victims, by death or such other punishment as a court-martial or military commission may direct, and, if death does not result to any of the victims, by such punishment, other than death, as a court-martial or military commission may direct.

Two or more persons are required in order to have a conspiracy. Knowledge of the identity of co-conspirators and their particular connection with the criminal purpose need not be established. The accused military member must be subject to the UCMJ, but the other co-conspirators need not be. A person may be guilty of conspiracy although incapable of committing the intended offense. For example, a bedridden conspirator may knowingly furnish the car to be used in a robbery. The joining of another conspirator after the conspiracy has been established does not create a new conspiracy or affect the status of the other conspirators. However, the conspirator who joined an existing conspiracy can be convicted of this offense only if, at or after the time of joining the conspiracy, an overt act in furtherance of the object of the agreement is committed.

The agreement in a conspiracy need not be in any particular form or manifested in any formal words. It is sufficient if the minds of the parties arrive at a common understanding to accomplish the object of the conspiracy, and this may be shown by the conduct of the parties. The agreement need not state the means by which the conspiracy is to be accomplished or what part each conspirator is to play.

The object of the agreement in the alleged conspiracy must, at least in part, involve the commission of one or more offenses under the UCMJ. An agreement to commit several offenses is ordinarily but a single conspiracy. Some offenses require two or more culpable actors acting in concert. There can be no conspiracy where the agreement exists only between the persons necessary to commit such an offense.

The overt act for an alleged conspiracy must be independent of the agreement to commit the offense; must take place at the time of or after the agreement; must be done by one or more of the conspirators, but not necessarily the accused military member; and must be done to effectuate the object of the agreement. The overt act need not be in itself criminal, but it must be a manifestation that the agreement is being executed. Although committing the intended offense may constitute the overt act, it is not essential that the object offense be committed. Any overt act is enough, no matter how preliminary or preparatory in nature, as long as it is a manifestation that the agreement is being executed.

Each alleged conspirator in a conspiracy is liable for all offenses committed pursuant to the conspiracy by any of the co-conspirators while the conspiracy continues and the accused military member remains a party to it. A party to the conspiracy who abandons or withdraws from the agreement to commit the offense before the commission of an overt act by any conspirator is not guilty of conspiracy.

It is not a defense that the means adopted by the conspirators to achieve their object, if apparently adapted to that end, were actually not capable of success, or that the conspirators were not physically able to accomplish their intended object. A conspiracy to commit an offense is a separate and distinct offense from the offense which is the object of the conspiracy, and both the conspiracy and the consummated offense which was its object may be charged, tried, and punished. The commission of the intended offense may also constitute the overt act which is an element of the conspiracy to commit that offense. So, for example, a military member could be accused of conspiracy to commit murder and commission of the alleged murder.

Military Soliciting Commission of Offenses (UCMJ Article 82)

Military solicitation allegations are charged under Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 82. This military offense covers the following:

A military member who solicits or advises another to commit an offense. The offense is complete when a solicitation is made or advice is given with the specific wrongful intent to influence another or others to commit any offense under the UCMJ. It is not necessary that the person or persons solicited or advised agree to or act upon the solicitation or advice. Solicitation may be by means other than word of mouth or writing. Any act or conduct which reasonably may be construed as a serious request or advice to commit any offense under the UCMJ may constitute solicitation. It is not necessary that the accused military member act alone in the solicitation or in the advising; the accused military member may act through other persons in committing this offense.

Over our many years of military law practice, our civilian court-martial defense lawyers have defended numerous military cases alleging these types of offenses. Depending on the factual scenario alleged, these cases can be complicated and can be quite serious.

Handling these serious military cases requires the expertise of a skilled military defense lawyer. A military member accused of these offenses could face extreme jeopardy – possible federal criminal conviction, lengthy jail terms, dishonorable discharge or dismissal, and a variety of other legal, professional, personal, and family consequences.

An experienced and aggressive defense attorney is absolutely vital in these military cases.

Civilian court-martial defense attorney Richard V. Stevens is a civilian criminal defense attorney and former active duty military JAG lawyer who exclusively practices military law and defends military members stationed around the world who are facing military trials, discipline and investigations. If you’re facing these military allegations, don’t hesitate to seek the legal help you’re going to need. For a free initial case consultation, please contact us.

No attorney can guarantee the outcome you seek in your military case. What we can promise is that we will apply our decades of experience to the defense of your military case. This includes our extensive experience in military law, military regulations, military investigations, military disciplinary actions, military adverse actions, and/or military court-martial trials and cases.

Client Testimonials and Reviews

Please see Client Testimonials and Client Reviews for Attorney Richard V. Stevens.

Law Firm Social Media Accounts

Please find updates on our law firm and our cases on our social media:
Our Blog
Successful Case Defenses Through 2025
Twitter X
Facebook
Instagram