Summary of changes
R.C.M. 1002 — Sentencing determination
The text as it stood in the last Manual for Courts-Martial edition beside the current text, provision by provision, with every recorded amendment and the authority behind it — the whole R.C.M. in one view.
1 amended
7 added
0 removed
30 unchanged
8 authority-backed edits · recorded
2026-07-14 – 2026-07-14
Authorities behind these changes
- Exec. Order 14130 (Dec. 20, 2024) · Executive Order, eff. 2024-12-20 · 8 changes
Showing every provision.
Provisions
1002(a)
unchanged
Original text
Generally.
Subject to limitations in this Manual, the sentence to be adjudged is a matter within the discretion of the court-martial. A court-martial may adjudge any punishment authorized in this Manual in order to achieve the purposes of sentencing under R.C.M. 1002(c), including the maximum punishment or any lesser punishment, or may adjudge a sentence of no punishment except as outlined below.
Current text
Generally.
Subject to limitations in this Manual, the sentence to be adjudged is a matter within the discretion of the court-martial. A court-martial may adjudge any punishment authorized in this Manual in order to achieve the purposes of sentencing under R.C.M. 1002(c), including the maximum punishment or any lesser punishment, or may adjudge a sentence of no punishment except as outlined below.
1002(a)(1)
unchanged
Original text
Mandatory minimum.
Unless otherwise authorized, when a mandatory minimum sentence is prescribed by the UCMJ, the sentence for an offense shall include any punishment that is made mandatory by law for that offense. The sentence for an offense may not be greater than the maximum sentence established by law or by the President for that offense.
Current text
Mandatory minimum.
Unless otherwise authorized, when a mandatory minimum sentence is prescribed by the UCMJ, the sentence for an offense shall include any punishment that is made mandatory by law for that offense. The sentence for an offense may not be greater than the maximum sentence established by law or by the President for that offense.
1002(a)(1)|D
unchanged
Original text
Under the UCMJ as amended though the James M. Inhofe National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023, Pub. L. No. 117- 263 136 Stat. 2395 (2022), R.C.M. 1002(a)(1) prohibits a plea agreement for a term of imprisonment less than life, with the eligibility for parole, for convictions under Article 118(1) and 118(4). See Article 56 and R.C.M. 1003.
Current text
Under the UCMJ as amended though the James M. Inhofe National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023, Pub. L. No. 117- 263 136 Stat. 2395 (2022), R.C.M. 1002(a)(1) prohibits a plea agreement for a term of imprisonment less than life, with the eligibility for parole, for convictions under Article 118(1) and 118(4). See Article 56 and R.C.M. 1003.
1002(a)(2)
unchanged
Original text
Parameters and criteria.
Current text
Parameters and criteria.
1002(a)(2)(A)
unchanged
Original text
When an offense is subject to sentencing criteria, the military judge shall consider the applicable sentencing criteria in determining the sentence for that offense.
Current text
When an offense is subject to sentencing criteria, the military judge shall consider the applicable sentencing criteria in determining the sentence for that offense.
1002(a)(2)(B)
unchanged
Original text
When an offense is subject to sentencing parameters, the military judge shall sentence the accused for that offense within the applicable parameter, unless the military judge finds specific facts that warrant a sentence outside the applicable parameter. If the military judge imposes a sentence outside a sentencing parameter, the military judge shall include in the record a written statement of the factual basis for the sentence.
Current text
When an offense is subject to sentencing parameters, the military judge shall sentence the accused for that offense within the applicable parameter, unless the military judge finds specific facts that warrant a sentence outside the applicable parameter. If the military judge imposes a sentence outside a sentencing parameter, the military judge shall include in the record a written statement of the factual basis for the sentence.
1002(a)(3)
unchanged
Original text
If the military judge accepts a plea agreement with a sentence limitation, the court-martial shall sentence the accused in accordance with the limits established by the plea agreement. Subject to Article 53a(c), the military judge shall accept a plea agreement submitted by the parties, except that—
Current text
If the military judge accepts a plea agreement with a sentence limitation, the court-martial shall sentence the accused in accordance with the limits established by the plea agreement. Subject to Article 53a(c), the military judge shall accept a plea agreement submitted by the parties, except that—
1002(a)(3)(A)
unchanged
Original text
in the case of an offense with a sentencing parameter, the military judge may reject a plea agreement that proposes a sentence that is outside the sentencing parameter if the military judge determines that the proposed sentence is plainly unreasonable; and
Current text
in the case of an offense with a sentencing parameter, the military judge may reject a plea agreement that proposes a sentence that is outside the sentencing parameter if the military judge determines that the proposed sentence is plainly unreasonable; and
1002(a)(3)(B)
unchanged
Original text
in the case of an offense for which there is no sentencing parameter, the military judge may reject a plea agreement that proposes a sentence if the military judge determines that the proposed sentence is plainly unreasonable.
Current text
in the case of an offense for which there is no sentencing parameter, the military judge may reject a plea agreement that proposes a sentence if the military judge determines that the proposed sentence is plainly unreasonable.
1002(b)
unchanged
Original text
Noncapital cases.
The military judge shall determine the sentence of a general or special court-martial in accordance with this subsection in all noncapital cases.
Current text
Noncapital cases.
The military judge shall determine the sentence of a general or special court-martial in accordance with this subsection in all noncapital cases.
1002(b)(1)
unchanged
Original text
Segmented sentencing for confinement and fines.
The military judge at a general or special court-martial shall determine an appropriate term of confinement and fine, if applicable, for each specification for which the accused was found guilty. Subject to R.C.M. 1002(a), such a determination may include a term of no confinement or no fine when appropriate for the offense.
Current text
Segmented sentencing for confinement and fines.
The military judge at a general or special court-martial shall determine an appropriate term of confinement and fine, if applicable, for each specification for which the accused was found guilty. Subject to R.C.M. 1002(a), such a determination may include a term of no confinement or no fine when appropriate for the offense.
1002(b)(2)
amended
Version history
Original text
Special court-martial.
The military judge shall, in a special court-martial, to the extent necessary, reduce the total confinement to the maximum confinement authorized under R.C.M. 201(f)(2).
Current text
Concurrent or Consecutive Terms of Confinement.
All changes since the original (removed / added)
Step-by-step: 1 recorded edit
| Version | Date | Authority | Note | Editor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| v2 | 2026-07-14 | Exec. Order 14130 (Dec. 20, 2024) (Executive Order, eff. 2024-12-20) | Section 1. Part II of the Manual for Courts-Martial, United States, is amended as follows: . . . (z) R.C.M. 1002(b)(2) is amended to read as follows: "(2) Concurrent or Consecutive Terms of Confinement. (A) If a sentence includes more than one term of confinement, the military judge shall determine whether the terms of confinement will run concurrently or consecutively. For each term of confinement, the military judge shall state whether the term of confinement is to run concurrently or consecutively with any other term or terms of confinement. (B) The terms of confinement for two or more specifications shall run concurrently— (i) when each specification involves the same victim and the same act or transaction; (ii) when provided for in a plea agreement; (iii) when the accused is found guilty of two or more specifications and the military judge finds that the charges or specifications are unreasonably multiplied; or (iv) in a special court-martial, to the extent necessary to prevent the total confinement from exceeding the maximum confinement authorized under R.C.M. 201(f)(2). (C) In all other circumstances, a military judge may exercise broad discretion in determining whether terms of confinement will run concurrently or consecutively consistent with R.C.M. 1002(c). Whether a term of confinement will run concurrently with another term of confinement should be determined only after determining the appropriate amount of confinement for each charge and specification." | admin |
1002(b)(2)(A)
added since original
Version history
Original text
Not in the original text — this provision was added later.
Current text
If a sentence includes more than one term of confinement, the military judge shall determine whether the terms of confinement will run concurrently or consecutively. For each term of confinement, the military judge shall state whether the term of confinement is to run concurrently or consecutively with any other term or terms of confinement.
All changes since the original (removed / added)
If a sentence includes more than one term of confinement, the military judge shall determine whether the terms of confinement will run concurrently or consecutively. For each term of confinement, the military judge shall state whether the term of confinement is to run concurrently or consecutively with any other term or terms of confinement.
Step-by-step: 1 recorded edit
| Version | Date | Authority | Note | Editor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| v1 | 2026-07-14 | Exec. Order 14130 (Dec. 20, 2024) (Executive Order, eff. 2024-12-20) | Section 1. Part II of the Manual for Courts-Martial, United States, is amended as follows: . . . (z) R.C.M. 1002(b)(2) is amended to read as follows: "(2) Concurrent or Consecutive Terms of Confinement. (A) If a sentence includes more than one term of confinement, the military judge shall determine whether the terms of confinement will run concurrently or consecutively. For each term of confinement, the military judge shall state whether the term of confinement is to run concurrently or consecutively with any other term or terms of confinement. | admin |
If a sentence includes more than one term of confinement, the military judge shall determine whether the terms of confinement will run concurrently or consecutively. For each term of confinement, the military judge shall state whether the term of confinement is to run concurrently or consecutively with any other term or terms of confinement. |
||||
1002(b)(2)(B)
added since original
Version history
Original text
Not in the original text — this provision was added later.
Current text
The terms of confinement for two or more specifications shall run concurrently—
All changes since the original (removed / added)
The terms of confinement for two or more specifications shall run concurrently—
Step-by-step: 1 recorded edit
| Version | Date | Authority | Note | Editor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| v1 | 2026-07-14 | Exec. Order 14130 (Dec. 20, 2024) (Executive Order, eff. 2024-12-20) | Section 1. Part II of the Manual for Courts-Martial, United States, is amended as follows: . . . (z) R.C.M. 1002(b)(2) is amended to read as follows: "(2) Concurrent or Consecutive Terms of Confinement. (B) The terms of confinement for two or more specifications shall run concurrently— | admin |
The terms of confinement for two or more specifications shall run concurrently— |
||||
1002(b)(2)(B)(i)
added since original
Version history
Original text
Not in the original text — this provision was added later.
Current text
when each specification involves the same victim and the same act or transaction;
All changes since the original (removed / added)
when each specification involves the same victim and the same act or transaction;
Step-by-step: 1 recorded edit
| Version | Date | Authority | Note | Editor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| v1 | 2026-07-14 | Exec. Order 14130 (Dec. 20, 2024) (Executive Order, eff. 2024-12-20) | Section 1. Part II of the Manual for Courts-Martial, United States, is amended as follows: . . . (z) R.C.M. 1002(b)(2) is amended to read as follows: "(2) Concurrent or Consecutive Terms of Confinement. (B) The terms of confinement for two or more specifications shall run concurrently— (i) when each specification involves the same victim and the same act or transaction; | admin |
when each specification involves the same victim and the same act or transaction; |
||||
1002(b)(2)(B)(ii)
added since original
Version history
Original text
Not in the original text — this provision was added later.
Current text
when provided for in a plea agreement;
All changes since the original (removed / added)
when provided for in a plea agreement;
Step-by-step: 1 recorded edit
| Version | Date | Authority | Note | Editor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| v1 | 2026-07-14 | Exec. Order 14130 (Dec. 20, 2024) (Executive Order, eff. 2024-12-20) | Section 1. Part II of the Manual for Courts-Martial, United States, is amended as follows: . . . (z) R.C.M. 1002(b)(2) is amended to read as follows: "(2) Concurrent or Consecutive Terms of Confinement. (B) The terms of confinement for two or more specifications shall run concurrently— ... (ii) when provided for in a plea agreement; | admin |
when provided for in a plea agreement; |
||||
1002(b)(2)(B)(iii)
added since original
Version history
Original text
Not in the original text — this provision was added later.
Current text
when the accused is found guilty of two or more specifications and the military judge finds that the charges or specifications are unreasonably multiplied; or
All changes since the original (removed / added)
when the accused is found guilty of two or more specifications and the military judge finds that the charges or specifications are unreasonably multiplied; or
Step-by-step: 1 recorded edit
| Version | Date | Authority | Note | Editor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| v1 | 2026-07-14 | Exec. Order 14130 (Dec. 20, 2024) (Executive Order, eff. 2024-12-20) | Section 1. Part II of the Manual for Courts-Martial, United States, is amended as follows: . . . (z) R.C.M. 1002(b)(2) is amended to read as follows: "(2) Concurrent or Consecutive Terms of Confinement. (B) The terms of confinement for two or more specifications shall run concurrently— ... (iii) when the accused is found guilty of two or more specifications and the military judge finds that the charges or specifications are unreasonably multiplied; or | admin |
when the accused is found guilty of two or more specifications and the military judge finds that the charges or specifications are unreasonably multiplied; or |
||||
1002(b)(2)(B)(iv)
added since original
Version history
Original text
Not in the original text — this provision was added later.
Current text
in a special court-martial, to the extent necessary to prevent the total confinement from exceeding the maximum confinement authorized under R.C.M. 201(f)(2).
All changes since the original (removed / added)
in a special court-martial, to the extent necessary to prevent the total confinement from exceeding the maximum confinement authorized under R.C.M. 201(f)(2).
Step-by-step: 1 recorded edit
| Version | Date | Authority | Note | Editor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| v1 | 2026-07-14 | Exec. Order 14130 (Dec. 20, 2024) (Executive Order, eff. 2024-12-20) | Section 1. Part II of the Manual for Courts-Martial, United States, is amended as follows: . . . (z) R.C.M. 1002(b)(2) is amended to read as follows: "(2) Concurrent or Consecutive Terms of Confinement. (B) The terms of confinement for two or more specifications shall run concurrently— ... (iv) in a special court-martial, to the extent necessary to prevent the total confinement from exceeding the maximum confinement authorized under R.C.M. 201(f)(2). | admin |
in a special court-martial, to the extent necessary to prevent the total confinement from exceeding the maximum confinement authorized under R.C.M. 201(f)(2). |
||||
1002(b)(2)(C)
added since original
Version history
Original text
Not in the original text — this provision was added later.
Current text
In all other circumstances, a military judge may exercise broad discretion in determining whether terms of confinement will run concurrently or consecutively consistent with R.C.M. 1002(c). Whether a term of confinement will run concurrently with another term of confinement should be determined only after determining the appropriate amount of confinement for each charge and specification.
All changes since the original (removed / added)
In all other circumstances, a military judge may exercise broad discretion in determining whether terms of confinement will run concurrently or consecutively consistent with R.C.M. 1002(c). Whether a term of confinement will run concurrently with another term of confinement should be determined only after determining the appropriate amount of confinement for each charge and specification.
Step-by-step: 1 recorded edit
| Version | Date | Authority | Note | Editor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| v1 | 2026-07-14 | Exec. Order 14130 (Dec. 20, 2024) (Executive Order, eff. 2024-12-20) | Section 1. Part II of the Manual for Courts-Martial, United States, is amended as follows: . . . (z) R.C.M. 1002(b)(2) is amended to read as follows: "(2) Concurrent or Consecutive Terms of Confinement. (C) In all other circumstances, a military judge may exercise broad discretion in determining whether terms of confinement will run concurrently or consecutively consistent with R.C.M. 1002(c). Whether a term of confinement will run concurrently with another term of confinement should be determined only after determining the appropriate amount of confinement for each charge and specification." | admin |
In all other circumstances, a military judge may exercise broad discretion in determining whether terms of confinement will run concurrently or consecutively consistent with R.C.M. 1002(c). Whether a term of confinement will run concurrently with another term of confinement should be determined only after determining the appropriate amount of confinement for each charge and specification. |
||||
1002(b)(3)
unchanged
Original text
Unitary sentencing for other forms of punishment.
All punishments other than confinement or a fine available under R.C.M. 1003, if any, shall be determined as a single, unitary component of the sentence, covering all of the guilty findings in their entirety. The military judge shall not segment those punishments among the guilty findings.
Current text
Unitary sentencing for other forms of punishment.
All punishments other than confinement or a fine available under R.C.M. 1003, if any, shall be determined as a single, unitary component of the sentence, covering all of the guilty findings in their entirety. The military judge shall not segment those punishments among the guilty findings.
1002(b)(3)|D
unchanged
Original text
The military judge should determine the appropriate amount of confinement or fine, if any, for each specification separately. The appropriate amount of confinement or fine that may be adjudged, if any, is at the discretion of the military judge subject to these rules. Whether a term of confinement should run concurrently with another term of confinement should be determined only after determining the appropriate amount of confinement for each charge and specification. A military judge may exercise broad discretion in determining whether terms of confinement will run concurrently or consecutively consistent with R.C.M. 1002(c). See R.C.M. 705(c)(2)(F) and 910(f)(5) regarding sentence limitations in plea agreements.
Current text
The military judge should determine the appropriate amount of confinement or fine, if any, for each specification separately. The appropriate amount of confinement or fine that may be adjudged, if any, is at the discretion of the military judge subject to these rules. Whether a term of confinement should run concurrently with another term of confinement should be determined only after determining the appropriate amount of confinement for each charge and specification. A military judge may exercise broad discretion in determining whether terms of confinement will run concurrently or consecutively consistent with R.C.M. 1002(c). See R.C.M. 705(c)(2)(F) and 910(f)(5) regarding sentence limitations in plea agreements.
1002(c)
unchanged
Original text
Imposition of sentence.
In sentencing an accused under this rule, the court-martial shall impose punishment that is sufficient, but not greater than necessary, to promote justice and to maintain good order and discipline in the United States Armed Forces, taking into consideration—
Current text
Imposition of sentence.
In sentencing an accused under this rule, the court-martial shall impose punishment that is sufficient, but not greater than necessary, to promote justice and to maintain good order and discipline in the United States Armed Forces, taking into consideration—
1002(c)(1)
unchanged
Original text
the nature and circumstances of the offense and the history and characteristics of the accused;
Current text
the nature and circumstances of the offense and the history and characteristics of the accused;
1002(c)(2)
unchanged
Original text
the impact of the offense on—
Current text
the impact of the offense on—
1002(c)(2)(A)
unchanged
Original text
the financial, social, psychological, or medical well-being of any victim of the offense; and
Current text
the financial, social, psychological, or medical well-being of any victim of the offense; and
1002(c)(2)(B)
unchanged
Original text
the mission, discipline, or efficiency of the command of the accused and any victim of the offense;
Current text
the mission, discipline, or efficiency of the command of the accused and any victim of the offense;
1002(c)(3)
unchanged
Original text
the need for the sentence to—
Current text
the need for the sentence to—
1002(c)(3)(A)
unchanged
Original text
reflect the seriousness of the offense;
Current text
reflect the seriousness of the offense;
1002(c)(3)(B)
unchanged
Original text
promote respect for the law;
Current text
promote respect for the law;
1002(c)(3)(C)
unchanged
Original text
provide just punishment for the offense;
Current text
provide just punishment for the offense;
1002(c)(3)(D)
unchanged
Original text
promote adequate deterrence of misconduct;
Current text
promote adequate deterrence of misconduct;
1002(c)(3)(E)
unchanged
Original text
protect others from further crimes by the accused;
Current text
protect others from further crimes by the accused;
1002(c)(3)(F)
unchanged
Original text
rehabilitate the accused; and
Current text
rehabilitate the accused; and
1002(c)(3)(G)
unchanged
Original text
provide, in appropriate cases, the opportunity for retraining and returning to duty to meet the needs of the service; and
Current text
provide, in appropriate cases, the opportunity for retraining and returning to duty to meet the needs of the service; and
1002(c)(4)
unchanged
Original text
the sentences available under these rules.
Current text
the sentences available under these rules.
1002(d)
unchanged
Original text
Information that may be considered.
The court-martial, in applying the factors listed in R.C.M. 1002(c) to the facts of a particular case, may consider—
Current text
Information that may be considered.
The court-martial, in applying the factors listed in R.C.M. 1002(c) to the facts of a particular case, may consider—
1002(d)(1)
unchanged
Original text
Any evidence admitted by the military judge during the presentencing proceeding under R.C.M. 1001; and
Current text
Any evidence admitted by the military judge during the presentencing proceeding under R.C.M. 1001; and
1002(d)(2)
unchanged
Original text
Any evidence admitted by the military judge during the findings proceeding.
Current text
Any evidence admitted by the military judge during the findings proceeding.
“Original text” is the state captured the first time a provision was edited under change tracking — i.e. the text as published in the last Manual for Courts-Martial edition. Provisions edited without being “marked as changed” (typos, formatting) are not recorded here; see the recent revisions feed and the site-wide changes log.