Article 91 — Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer

Part IV · Punitive Articles

Article 91. Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer · MCM ¶ 17

2024 Manual for Courts-Martial, United States

(a) Text of statute. Any warrant officer or enlisted member who—

(1) strikes or assaults a warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer, while that officer is in the execution of his office;

(2) willfully disobeys the lawful order of a warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer; or

(3) 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 office;

shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

(b) Elements.

(1) Striking or assaulting warrant, noncommissioned, or petty officer.

(a) That the accused was a warrant officer or enlisted member;

(b) That the accused struck or assaulted a certain warrant, noncommissioned, or petty officer;

(d) That the accused then knew that the person struck or assaulted was a warrant, noncommissioned, or petty officer.

Practice Note

[Note: If the victim was the superior noncommissioned or petty officer of the accused, add the following elements]

(e) That the victim was the superior noncommissioned, or petty officer of the accused; and

(f) That the accused then knew that the person struck or assaulted was the accused’s superior noncommissioned, or petty officer.

(2) Disobeying a warrant, noncommissioned, or petty officer.

(a) That the accused was a warrant officer or enlisted member;

(b) That the accused received a certain lawful order from a certain warrant, noncommissioned, or petty officer;

(d) That the accused had a duty to obey the order; and

(e) That the accused willfully disobeyed the order.

(3) Treating with contempt or being disrespectful in language or deportment toward a warrant, noncommissioned, or petty officer.

(a) That the accused was a warrant officer or enlisted member;

(b) That the accused did or omitted certain acts, or used certain language;

(c) That such behavior or language was used toward and within sight or hearing of a certain warrant, noncommissioned, or petty officer;

(d) That the accused then knew that the person toward whom the behavior or language was directed was a warrant, noncommissioned, or petty officer;

(e) That the victim was then in the execution of office; and

(f) That under the circumstances the accused, by such behavior or language, treated with contempt or was disrespectful to said warrant, noncommissioned, or petty officer.

Practice Note

[Note: If the victim was the superior noncommissioned, or petty officer of the accused, add the following elements]

(g) That the victim was the superior noncommissioned, or petty officer of the accused; and

(h) That the accused then knew that the person toward whom the behavior or language was directed was the accused’s superior noncommissioned, or petty officer.

(1) In general. Article 91 has the same general objects with respect to warrant, noncommissioned, and petty officers as Articles 89 and 90 have with respect to commissioned officers, namely, to ensure obedience to their lawful orders, and to protect them from violence, insult, or disrespect. Unlike Articles 89 and 90, however, this article does not require a superior-subordinate relationship as an element of any of the offenses denounced. This article does not protect an acting noncommissioned officer or acting petty officer, nor does it protect military police or members of the shore patrol who are not warrant, noncommissioned, or petty officers.

(2) Knowledge. All of the offenses prohibited by Article 91 require that the accused have actual knowledge that the victim was a warrant, noncommissioned, or petty officer. Actual knowledge may be proved by circumstantial evidence.

(3) Striking or assaulting a warrant, noncommissioned, or petty officer. For a discussion of “strikes” and “in the execution of office,” see subparagraph 15.c. For a discussion of “assault,” see subparagraph 77.c. An assault by a prisoner who has been discharged from the Service, or by any other civilian subject to military law, upon a warrant, noncommissioned, or petty officer should be charged under Article 128 or 134.

(4) Disobeying a warrant, noncommissioned, or petty officer. See subparagraph 16.c for a discussion of lawfulness, personal nature, form, transmission, and specificity of the order, nature of the disobedience, and time for compliance with the order.

(5) Treating with contempt or being disrespectful in language or deportment toward a warrant, noncommissioned, or petty officer. “Toward” requires that the behavior and language be within the sight or hearing of the warrant, noncommissioned, or petty officer concerned. For a discussion of “in the execution of his office,” see subparagraph 15.c. For a discussion of “disrespect,” see subparagraph 15.c.

(d) Maximum punishment.

(1) Striking or assaulting warrant officer. Dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for 5 years.

(2) Striking or assaulting superior noncommissioned or petty officer. Dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for 3 years.

(3) Striking or assaulting other noncommissioned or petty officer. Dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for 1 year.

(4) Willfully disobeying the lawful order of a warrant officer. Dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for 2 years.

(5) Willfully disobeying the lawful order of a noncommissioned or petty officer. Bad-conduct discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for 1 year.

(6) Contempt or disrespect to warrant officer. Bad-conduct discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for 9 months.

(7) Contempt or disrespect to superior noncommissioned or petty officer. Bad-conduct discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for 6 months.

(8) Contempt or disrespect to other noncommissioned or petty officer. Forfeiture of two-thirds pay per month for 3 months, and confinement for 3 months.

(e) Sample specifications.

(1) Striking or assaulting warrant, noncommissioned, or petty officer. In that __________ (personal jurisdiction data), did, (at/on board—location) (subject-matter jurisdiction data, if required), on or about _____ 20 __, (strike) (assault) __________, a __________ officer, then known to the said __________ to be a (superior) __________ officer who was then in the execution of (his) (her) office, by __________ (him) (her) (in) (on) (the __________) with (a) __________ ((his) (her)) _____________.

(2) Willful disobedience of warrant, noncommissioned, or petty officer. In that __________ (personal jurisdiction data), having received a lawful order from __________, a _____ officer, then known by the said _____ to be a _____ officer, to _____, an order which it was (his) (her) duty to obey, did (at/on board—location) (subject-matter jurisdiction data, if required), on or about _____ 20 __, willfully disobey the same.

(3) Contempt or disrespect toward warrant, noncommissioned, or petty officer. In that __________ (personal jurisdiction data) (at/on board—location) (subject-matter jurisdiction data, if required), on or about _____ 20 __, [did treat with contempt] [was disrespectful in (language) (deportment) toward] __________, a __________ officer, then known by the said __________ to be a (superior) __________ officer, who was then in the execution of (his) (her) office, by (saying to (him) (her), “__________,” or words to that effect) (spitting at (his) (her) feet) (__________).

Information on this tab is reproduced from the U.S. Army Military Judges’ Benchbook (Electronic Benchbook v2.70, updated 2026-05-26). It is for informational purposes only to compare to the text on the Manual for Courts-Martial on the MCM tab. Always check the current EBB to make sure you’re reviewing the most recent information.

NOTE 1. If convicted of only offenses committed on or after 28 December 2023, the judge shall sentence the accused in accordance with the sentencing parameters or criteria, as appropriate, or state reasons for deviating in writing. See RCM 925(c)(2), RCM 1002(a)(2), Appendices 12B (Parameter Table-Confinement Categories), 12C (Offense Category Chart), and 12D (List of Criteria Offenses), 2024 MCM.

Maximum punishment

(1) Striking or assaulting warrant officer: DD, TF, 5 years, E-1. (Category 2)

(2) Striking or assaulting superior noncommissioned or petty officer: DD, TF, 3 years, E-1. (Category 2)

(3) Striking or assaulting other noncommissioned or petty officer: DD, TF, 1 year, E-1. (Category 1)

Sample specification

In that __________ (personal jurisdiction data), did, (at/on board—location) (subject-matter jurisdiction data, if required), on or about __________, (strike) (assault) __________, a __________ officer, then known to the said __________ to be a (superior) __________ officer who was then in the execution of (his) (her) office, by __________ (him) (her) (in) (on) (the __________) with (a) __________ ((his) (her)) __________.

Elements

(1) That (state the time alleged), the accused was (an enlisted servicemember) (a warrant officer);

(2) That (state the time and place alleged) the accused (struck) (assaulted) (state the name and rank or grade of the person alleged) by (state the alleged manner of the striking or assault);

(3) That, at the time, (state the name and rank or grade of the person alleged) was in the execution of his/her office; (and)

(4) That the accused then knew that (state the name and rank or grade of the person alleged) was a (noncommissioned) (warrant) (petty) officer;

NOTE 2. Victim the superior noncommissioned/petty officer of the accused. If the victim was the accused’s superior noncommissioned or petty officer, the following two elements apply:

[(5)] That (state the name and rank or grade of the person alleged) was the superior (noncommissioned) (petty) officer of the accused; and

[(6)] That the accused then knew that (state the name and rank or grade of the person alleged) was his/her superior (noncommissioned) (petty) officer.

Definitions & other instructions

A (noncommissioned) (warrant) (petty) officer is “in the execution of his/her office” when engaged in any act or service required or authorized by treaty, statute, regulation, the order of a superior, or military usage.

(The term “(noncommissioned) (petty) officer” does not include an acting (noncommissioned) (petty) officer.)

(“Struck” means an intentional contact and includes any offensive touching of the person, however slight.)

NOTE 3. Defining assault. When necessary, the judge should supplement these instructions with appropriately tailored instructions on “assault” and “assault consummated by battery.” See para. 3-52-1 and 3-52-2.

NOTE 4. Assault on superior charged. If charged with assault upon a superior noncommissioned or petty officer, give the following instruction:

“Superior (noncommissioned) (petty) officer” means a (noncommissioned) (petty) officer superior in rank to the accused.

NOTE 5. Divestiture of status defense. If divestiture of status is raised, instruct as follows:

The evidence has raised an issue as to whether (state the name and rank of the warrant, noncommissioned, or petty officer) conducted himself/herself prior to the alleged offense in a manner which took away his/her status as a (noncommissioned) (warrant) (petty) officer acting in the execution of his/her office. A (noncommissioned) (petty) (warrant) officer whose own (language) (and) (conduct) under all the circumstances departs substantially from the required standards appropriate for that individual’s rank and position under similar circumstances is considered to have abandoned that rank and position. In determining this issue, you must consider all the relevant facts and circumstances (including but not limited to (here the military judge may specify significant evidentiary factors bearing on the issue and indicate the respective contentions of counsel for both sides)).

You may find the accused guilty of the offense of assault on a (noncommissioned) (warrant) (petty) officer in violation of Article 91 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice only if you are satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that (state the name and rank of the warrant, noncommissioned, or petty officer) did not abandon his/her status as a (noncommissioned) (warrant) (petty) officer acting in the execution of his/her office.

NOTE 6. Other instructions. Instruction 7-3, Circumstantial Evidence (Knowledge), is ordinarily applicable.

Source: Instruction 3a-17-1 · view original on jagcnet.army.mil

Maximum punishment

(1) Willfully disobeying warrant officer: DD, TF, 2 years, E-1. (Category 1)

(2) Willfully disobeying a noncommissioned or petty officer: BCD, TF, 1 year, E-1. (Category 1)

Sample specification

In that __________ (personal jurisdiction data), having received a lawful order from _________, a __________ officer, then known by the said __________ to be a __________ officer, to __________, an order which it was (his) (her) duty to obey, did (at/on board--location), on or about __________, willfully disobey the same.

Elements

(1) That (state the time alleged), the accused was (an enlisted service member) (a warrant officer);

(2) That the accused received a certain lawful order to (state the terms of the order allegedly given) from (state the name and rank or grade of the person alleged);

(3) That the accused then knew that (state the name and rank or grade of the person alleged) was a (warrant) (noncommissioned) (petty) officer;

(4) That the accused had a duty to obey the order; and

(5) That (state the time and place alleged), the accused willfully disobeyed the order.

Definitions & other instructions

“Willful disobedience” means an intentional defiance of authority.

NOTE 2. Lawfulness of order. The lawfulness of the order is not a separate element of the offense. Thus, the issue of lawfulness is determined by the MJ and is not submitted to the members. See US v. New, 55 MJ 95 (CAAF 2001); US v. Deisher, 61 MJ 313 (CAAF 2005). If the MJ determines that, based on the facts, the order was not lawful, the MJ should dismiss the affected specification, and the members should be so advised. To be lawful, the order must relate to specific military duty and be one that the noncommissioned/warrant/petty officer was authorized to give the accused. The order must require the accused to do or stop doing a particular thing either at once or at a future time. An order is lawful if reasonably necessary to safeguard and protect the morale, discipline, and usefulness of the members of a command and is directly connected with the maintenance of good order in the services. An order is illegal if, for example, it is unrelated to military duty, its sole purpose is to accomplish some private end, it is arbitrary and unreasonable, and/or it is given for the sole purpose of increasing the punishment for an offense which it is expected the accused may commit. The four preceding sentences may be modified and used by the MJ during a providence inquiry to define “lawfulness” for the accused.) When the MJ determines that, based on the facts, the order was lawful, the MJ should advise the members as follows:

As a matter of law, the order in this case, as described in the specification, if in fact there was such an order, was a lawful order.

NOTE 3. Form or method of communication in issue. If the evidence raises an issue as to the form or method of communicating the command, give the following:

As long as the order was understandable, (the form of the order) (and) (the method by which the order was communicated to the accused) (is) (are) not important. The communication, however, must amount to an order from a (noncommissioned) (warrant) (petty) officer that is directed personally to the accused, and the accused must know it is from a (noncommissioned) (warrant) (petty) officer.

NOTE 4. Divestiture of status raised. When the issue has arisen whether the officer’s conduct divested him or her of the status of a noncommissioned, warrant, or petty officer, the following instruction is appropriate:

The evidence has raised an issue as to whether (state the name and rank or grade of the person alleged) conducted himself/herself prior to the alleged offense in a manner which took away his/her status as a (noncommissioned) (warrant) (petty) officer. A (noncommissioned) (petty) (warrant) officer whose own (language) (and) (conduct) under all the circumstances depart(s) substantially from the required standards appropriate for that individual’s rank and position under similar circumstances is considered to have abandoned that rank and position. In determining this issue, you must consider all the relevant facts and circumstances (including, but not limited to (here the military judge may specify the significant evidentiary factors bearing on the issue and indicate the respective contentions of counsel for both sides)).

You may find the accused guilty of (specify the offense(s)) only if you are satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that (state the name and rank or grade of the person alleged) did not abandon his/her status as a (noncommissioned) (warrant) (petty) officer.

NOTE 5. Other instructions. Instruction 7-3, Circumstantial Evidence (Knowledge and Intent), is ordinarily applicable.

Source: Instruction 3a-17-2 · view original on jagcnet.army.mil

Maximum punishment

(1) To a warrant officer: BCD, TF, 9 months, E-1. (Category 1)

(2) To superior noncommissioned or petty officer: BCD, TF, 6 months, E-1. (Category 1)

(3) To other noncommissioned or petty officer: 2/3 x 3 months, 3 months, E-1. (Category 1)

Sample specification

In that __________ (personal jurisdiction data) (at/on board—location), on or about _________, [did treat with contempt] [was disrespectful in (language) (deportment) toward] __________, a __________ officer, then known by the said __________ to be a (superior) __________ officer, who was then in the execution of (his) (her) office, by (saying to (him) (her), “__________,” or words to that effect) (spitting at (his) (her) feet) (__________).

Elements

(1) That (state the time alleged), the accused was (an enlisted service member) (a warrant officer);

(2) That (state the time and place alleged), the accused [(did) (omitted) (a) certain act(s)] [used certain language], to wit: ________;

(3) That the accused’s (behavior) (language) was used toward and within sight or hearing of (state the name and rank or grade of the person alleged);

(4) That the accused then knew that (state the name and rank or grade of the person alleged) was a (noncommissioned) (warrant) (petty) officer;

(5) That (state the name and rank or grade of the person alleged) was then in the execution of his/her office; (and)

(6) That, under the circumstances, by such (behavior) (language), the accused (treated with contempt) (was disrespectful toward) (state the name and rank or grade of the person alleged);

NOTE 2. If victim is alleged to have been the superior of the accused. If the specification alleges that the victim was the superior noncommissioned officer or petty officer of the accused, the military judge must instruct on the following two elements:

[(7)] That (state the name and rank or grade of the person alleged) was the superior (noncommissioned) (petty) officer of the accused; and

[(8)] That the accused then knew that (state the name and rank or grade of the person alleged) was (his) (her) superior (noncommissioned) (petty) officer.

Definitions & other instructions

(The term “(noncommissioned) (petty) officer” does not include an acting (noncommissioned) (petty) officer.)

(“Superior (noncommissioned) (petty) officer” means a (noncommissioned) (petty) officer superior in rank to the accused.)

(“Contempt” means insulting, rude, and disdainful conduct, or otherwise disrespectfully attributing to another qualities of meanness, disreputableness, or worthlessness.)

(“Disrespectful” means behavior that detracts from the respect due the authority and person of a (warrant) (noncommissioned) (petty) officer. It may consist of acts or language, however expressed, and it is immaterial whether they refer to the (warrant) (noncommissioned) (petty) officer as an officer or as a private individual.)

(Disrespect by words may be conveyed by abusive epithets or other contemptuous or denunciatory language. Truth is no defense.)

(Disrespect by acts includes (neglecting the customary salute, or) showing a marked disdain, indifference, insolence, impertinence, undue familiarity, or other rudeness in the presence of the (warrant) (noncommissioned) (petty) officer.)

NOTE 3. Divestiture of status raised. When the issue has arisen whether the officer’s conduct divested that officer of the status as a noncommissioned, warrant, or petty officer acting in the execution of office, the following instruction is appropriate:

The evidence has raised an issue as to whether (state the name and rank or grade of the person alleged) conducted himself/herself prior to the alleged offense in a manner which took away his/her status as a (noncommissioned) (warrant) (petty) officer acting in the execution of his/her office. A (noncommissioned) (petty) (warrant) officer whose own (language) (and) (conduct) under all the circumstances departs substantially from the required standards appropriate for that individual’s rank and position under similar circumstances is considered to have abandoned that rank and position. In determining this issue, you must consider all the relevant facts and circumstances (including but not limited to (here the military judge may specify significant evidentiary factors bearing on the issue and indicate the respective contentions of counsel for both sides)).

NOTE 4. Other instructions. Instruction 7-3, Circumstantial Evidence (Knowledge), is ordinarily applicable.

Source: Instruction 3a-17-3 · view original on jagcnet.army.mil