Part IV · Punitive Articles

Article 134. Debt, dishonorably failing to pay · MCM ¶ 96

2024 Manual for Courts-Martial, United States

Recent revisions Summary of changes Cited by (16)
(a) Text of statute. See paragraph 91.
(b) Elements.
(1) That the accused was indebted to a certain person or entity in a certain sum;
(2) That this debt became due and payable on or about a certain date;
(3) That while the debt was still due and payable the accused dishonorably failed to pay this debt; and
(4) That, under the circumstances, the conduct of the accused was either: (i) to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces; (ii) was of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces; or (iii) to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces and of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces.
(c) Explanation. More than negligence in nonpayment is necessary. The failure to pay must be characterized by deceit, evasion, false promises, or other distinctly culpable circumstances indicating a deliberate nonpayment or grossly indifferent attitude toward one’s just obligations. For a debt to form the basis of this offense, the accused must not have had a defense, or an equivalent offset or counterclaim, either in fact or according to the accused’s belief, at the time alleged. The offense should not be charged if there was a genuine dispute between the parties as to the facts or law relating to the debt which would affect the obligation of the accused to pay. The offense is not committed if the creditor or creditors involved are satisfied with the conduct of the debtor with respect to payment. The length of the period of nonpayment and any denial of indebtedness which the accused may have made may tend to prove that the accused’s conduct was dishonorable, but the court-martial may convict only if it finds from all of the evidence that the conduct was in fact dishonorable.
(d) Maximum punishment. Bad-conduct discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for 6 months.
(e) Sample specification. In that __________ (personal jurisdiction data), being indebted to _____ in the sum of $_____ for _____, which amount became due and payable (on) (about) (on or about) _____ 20 __, did (at/on board— location) (subject-matter jurisdiction data, if required), from _____ 20 __, to _____ 20 __, dishonorably fail to pay said debt, and that said conduct was (to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces) (of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces) (to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces and of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces).
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.
3a-96-1DEBT-DISHONORABLY FAILING TO PAY
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

BCD, TF, 6 months, and E-1. (Category 1)

Sample specification

In that __________ (personal jurisdiction data), being indebted to __________ in the sum of $__________ for __________, which amount became due and payable (on) (about) (on or about) __________, did, (at/on board—location), from __________ to __________, dishonorably fail to pay said debt, and that said conduct was (to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces) (of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces) (to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces and of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces).

Elements

(1) That the accused was indebted to (state the name of the person or entity alleged) in the sum of (state the amount alleged) for (state the alleged debt);

(2) That this debt became due and payable on or about (state the date alleged);

(3) That (state the place alleged), from about __________ to about __________ while the debt was still due and payable, the accused dishonorably failed to pay this debt; and

(4) That, under the circumstances, the conduct of the accused was (to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces) (of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces) (to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces and of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces).

Definitions & other instructions

(“Conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline” is conduct which causes a reasonably direct and obvious injury to good order and discipline.)

(“Service discrediting conduct” is conduct which tends to harm the reputation of the service or lower it in public esteem.)

The failure to pay the debt must have been the result of more than mere negligence, that is, the absence of due care. The failure to pay must be dishonorable. A failure to pay is “dishonorable” if it (is (fraudulent) (deceitful) (a willful evasion) (deliberate) (based on false promises)) (results from a grossly indifferent attitude toward one’s just obligations) (__________).

NOTE 2. Gambling debts. In US v. Falcon, 65 MJ 386 (CAAF 2008), CAAF overruled its historical position that public policy prevents using the UCMJ to enforce debts incurred from legal gambling and checks written to obtain proceeds with which to gamble legally (commonly called the “gambler’s defense”). See US v. Wallace, 36 CMR 148 (CMA 1966), US v. Allberry, 44 MJ 226 (CAAF 1996); US v. Green, 44 MJ 828 (ACCA 1996).
Note. that CAAF in Falcon declined to apply “a sweeping defense based on public policy” to allegations that third-party complicity negates a required element of an offense, stating the issue would be addressed on a case-by-case basis. CAAF reiterated that the government maintains the burden of proving each element beyond a reasonable doubt and the accused remains free to raise such facts that show his conduct does not satisfy a necessary element. Id., at footnote 4.
CAAF also specifically declined to address the ongoing validity of US v. Walter, 23 CMR 275 (CMA 1957), and US v. Lenton, 25 CMR 194 (CMA 1958), because Falcon dealt with legal gambling and Walter and Lenton dealt with illegal gambling. Falcon, at footnote 6. Until CAAF specifically addresses the ongoing validity of Walter and Lenton, if there is an issue whether the debt arose from illegal gambling, the first two paragraphs of the instruction below should be given. If there is an issue that some but not all of the debt(s) arose from illegal gambling, the third paragraph of the instruction below should also be given.

The evidence has raised the issue whether the debt(s) in question (was) (were) from gambling illegally. The Uniform Code of Military Justice may not be used to enforce debts from gambling illegally when the purported victim was a party to, or actively facilitated, the gambling.

To find the accused guilty of the offense in (The) Specification(s) (___) of (The) (Additional) Charge(s) (___), you must be convinced beyond reasonable doubt that the debt(s) in question (was) (were) not debt(s) from gambling illegally. Even if the debt(s) (was) (were) from gambling illegally, if you are convinced beyond reasonable doubt that the purported victim was not a party to and did not actively facilitate the illegal gambling, and otherwise did not have knowledge of the illegal gambling-related purpose of the debt, you may find the accused guilty when all other elements of the offense have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

(The evidence has also raised the issue whether all or only part of the debt(s) in question (was) (were) from gambling illegally. The UCMJ limitation I mentioned only extends to that part of the debt(s) that (was) (were) from gambling illegally. If you find this is the case and all other elements of the offense have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, you may find the accused guilty by exceptions and substitutions only to that part of the debt(s) which you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt (was) (were) not from gambling illegally. You do this by excepting the value(s) alleged in the specification(s) and substituting that/those value(s) of which you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt (was) (were) not a debt from gambling illegally.)

NOTE 3. Mistake of fact—criminal state of mind and satisfaction on the obligation. The accused must have had a “criminal mind” in the sense that the accused must have had a grossly indifferent attitude toward the state of the accused’s just obligations to be guilty of this offense. The military judge should, therefore, be alert to evidence inconsistent with such “criminal mind,” such as a satisfaction of the debt, an accord with the creditor, or a mistake as to the terms of the debt. On the other hand, ultimate “satisfaction” of the creditor in the sense that the obligation has been paid at the time of trial does not necessarily mean “satisfaction” with the accused’s conduct while the obligation remained unpaid. See US v. Moseley, 35 MJ 481 (CMA 1992) with respect to this issue in a worthless check prosecution. Instruction 5-13, Mistake of Fact, may be applicable.
NOTE 4. Conduct pled as both prejudicial to good order and discipline and service discrediting. When the conduct is pled as both prejudicial to good order and discipline and service discrediting, the following instruction should be given:

The government has alleged that the conduct in question in (The) Specification (___) of (The) (Additional) Charge (___) was to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces and of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces. To convict the accused of the offense charged, you must be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt of all the elements, including that the accused’s conduct was to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces and of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces. If you are convinced of all the elements except the element of the service discrediting nature of the conduct, you may still convict the accused of the offense charged. In this event, you must make appropriate findings by excepting the language “of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces.” On the other hand, if you are convinced of all the elements except the element of prejudice to good order and discipline in the armed forces, you may still convict the accused of the offense charged. In this event, you must make appropriate findings by excepting the language “to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces.” Of course, if you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the conduct in question was both to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces and of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces, then you may convict the accused as charged provided you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt as to the other elements of (The) Specification (___) of (The) (Additional) Charge (___).

References

US v. Gardner, 35 MJ 300 (CMA 1992); US v. Falcon, 65 MJ 386 (CAAF 2008).

Source: Instruction 3a-96-1 · view original on jagcnet.army.mil
Cross-referencesCited by 16Cites 1Elsewhere 3
Cited by

Provisions elsewhere in the Manual whose text cites Article 134. Each link opens the citing provision.

Rules for Courts-Martial
Discussion under R.C.M. 307(c)(2) — Preferral of charges generally
…Preemption . An offense specifically defined by Articles 81 through 132 may not be alleged as a violation of Article 134 . See paragraph 91.c.(5)(a) of Part IV. But see R.C.M. 307(d). (D) Charges under the law of war . In the…
R.C.M. 307(c)(3) — Preferral of charges generally
…every element of the charged offense expressly or by necessary implication; however, specifications under Article 134 must expressly allege the terminal element. Except for aggravating factors under R.C.M. 1003(d) and R.C.M.…
Discussion under R.C.M. 307(c)(3) — Preferral of charges generally
…knowledge, or state of mind is an element of the offense, it must be alleged. To state an offense under Article 134, practitioners must expressly allege the terminal element. All offenses under Article 134 require proof of a…
Discussion under R.C.M. 809(a) — Contempt proceedings generally
…person subject to the UCMJ who commits contempt may be tried by court-martial or otherwise disciplined under Article 134 for such misconduct in addition to or instead of punishment for contempt. See paragraph 85, Part IV; see…
Military Rules of Evidence
Mil. R. Evid. 504(c)(2)(C) — Marital privilege generally
In proceedings in which a spouse is charged, in accordance with Article 133 or 134, with importing the other spouse as an alien for prostitution or other immoral purpose in violation of 8…
UCMJ Punitive Articles
Article 81, ¶ 5.c.(9) — Conspiracy generally
Special conspiracies under Article 134. The United States Code prohibits conspiracies to commit certain specific offenses which do not require an…
Article 85, ¶ 9.c.(4) — Desertion generally
…warrant, such a prisoner could be charged with escape from confinement under Article 87a or an offense under Article 134.
Article 91, ¶ 17.c.(3) — Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer generally
…civilian subject to military law, upon a warrant, noncommissioned, or petty officer should be charged under Article 128 or 134.
Article 129, ¶ 79.c.(6) — Burglary; unlawful entry generally
…purposes. However, depending on the circumstances, an intrusion into such property may be punishable under Article 134, UCMJ as conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline or of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed…
Article 134, ¶ 91.c.(6)(a) — General article
…terminal element. If conduct by an accused does not fall under any of the enumerated Article 134 offenses (paragraphs 92 through 109 of this Part), a specification not listed in this Manual may be used to allege the offense.
Article 134, ¶ 94.c. — Check, worthless making and uttering – by dishonorably failing to maintain funds
…bad faith or gross indifference in this regard. As in the offense of dishonorable failure to pay debts (see paragraph 96), dishonorable conduct of the accused is necessary, and the other principles discussed in paragraph 96 also…
Uniform Code of Military Justice
Art. 1(17)(A) — Definitions generally
…130), section 932 (article 132), the standalone offense of child pornography punishable under section 934 (article 134), or the standalone offense of sexual harassment punishable under section 934 (article 134) of this title in…
Art. 24a(d)(1)(A) — Special trial counsel generally
…section 928b (article 128b), or the standalone offense of child pornography punishable under section 934 (article 134) of this title that occurred on or before December 27, 2023.
Art. 24a(d)(1)(C) — Special trial counsel generally
…an act of nonconsensual sodomy, or the standalone offense of kidnapping punishable under section 934 (article 134) of this title that occurred before January 1, 2019.
Art. 24a(d)(2)(A) — Special trial counsel generally
The standalone offense of sexual harassment punishable under section 934 of this title (article 134) in each instance in which—
Art. 137(a)(3) — Articles to be explained generally
…to sections 802, 803, 807– 815, 825, 827, 831, 837, 838, 855, 877–934, and 937–939 of this title (articles 2, 3, 7–15, 25, 27, 31, 37, 38, 55, 77–134, and 137–139).
Article 134 cites

Provisions named in the text of Article 134. Where the cited provision is on this site, the link opens it.

Elsewhere on this site
Lesser included offenses (Art. 79)
A lesser included offense of 1 greater offense
Maximum punishment chart (App. 12) 41
41 chart lines for Article 134
Statute of limitations checker
Article 43 has an article-specific rule for this offense