- the relevant text of Article 91(3), UCMJ, states that any warrant officer or enlisted member who treats with contempt or is disrespectful in language or deportment toward a warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer, while that officer is in the execution of his or her office shall be punished as a court-martial may direct; the language of Article 91(3), UCMJ, is quite broad; however, the elements supplied by the President narrow the scope of the offense; in pertinent part, the elements make it a crime for a warrant or enlisted member to use disrespectful language or behavior toward and within sight or hearing of a victim warrant officer, noncommissioned, or petty officer; because the President had the authority to constrict the scope of the statute in this manner, it is the President's language contained within the elements of the MCM that guides an appellate court's analysis
- an accused servicemember can be convicted under Article 91(3) even if his or her disrespectful conduct occurs outside the physical presence of the victim; that means that disrespectful language or behavior towards a warrant, noncommissioned, or petty officer can be criminally actionable even when it is remotely conveyed using a digital device such as a smartphone and even when the disrespectful language or behavior is conveyed via social media
- under Article 91(3), UCMJ, servicemembers can only be held criminally liable if at the time they conveyed the disrespectful language or behavior, the victim was then in the execution of his or her office
- in this case, the government failed to introduce evidence demonstrating that two of the petty officer victims were on duty when appellant sent them disrespectful texts; accordingly, these two convictions cannot withstand appellate scrutiny and the findings are set aside; however, there is sufficient evidence that the third petty officer victim was in the execution of his office at the time appellant engaged in the disrespectful conduct, and accordingly, that conviction is affirmed
CAAF Opinion Digest · III.AA.17 · Crimes Offenses on/after 1 Jan 2019
Article 91 - Insubordinate Conduct Toward Warrant Officer, Noncommissioned Officer, or Petty Officer
Offenses committed on or after 1 January 2019 (post-2016 amendment) — opinions from the 2021 Term of Court forward.
For offenses before 1 January 2019 see
III.A — Article 91 - Insubordinate Conduct Toward Warrant Officer, Noncommissioned Officer, or Petty Officer.
1 digested opinion, 2023–2023 Terms
2023 (October Term)
Source and status
This is a verbatim mirror of the Opinion Digest and opinions tables published by the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces. The headnotes are the court staff’s summaries of the opinions, reproduced as published; they are not the opinions themselves and not this site’s commentary. Nothing here is edited on this site.
Last updated by the court: Oct 13, 2026 · mirrored Oct 29, 2026 · digest page IIIAA17 · Always confirm a holding against the opinion itself (linked from each case name).