AWOL Charges Under Article 86: What You Need to Know to Protect Your Career and Future

Charged with AWOL? You’re Not Alone—And You Have Options

If you’re facing charges under Article 86, Absence Without Leave (AWOL), you’re likely feeling overwhelmed, anxious about your future, and uncertain about what comes next. You might be wondering:

• Will I lose my career over this?
• What are the real consequences of an AWOL conviction?
• Is there any way to fight these charges or get them dismissed?
• How much will an attorney cost, and is hiring one worth it?

At National Security Law Firm, we understand exactly what’s at stake. AWOL charges don’t just threaten your military service—they can impact your rank, benefits, security clearance, and future civilian career. Whether your absence was due to a misunderstanding, an emergency, or a lapse in judgment, the military justice system can be unforgiving. But you are not out of options.

Our attorneys are battle-tested, aggressive litigators who have helped service members nationwide successfully fight AWOL charges, reduce penalties, and even secure dismissals. With decades of experience in military defense—including former JAG officers and military prosecutors—we know how to challenge the government’s case, expose weaknesses in the prosecution’s arguments, and build the strongest possible defense for you.

What You’ll Learn in This Guide

This guide is designed to answer every critical question you have about Article 86 charges and help you take immediate action to protect your future. Inside, we’ll cover:

✅ The cost of hiring a military defense lawyer—and how legal financing can help.
✅ The most common mistakes service members make when facing AWOL charges—and how to avoid them.
✅ The strongest defense strategies for getting your charges reduced or dismissed.
✅ What happens if you’re found guilty—including military and civilian consequences.
✅ How to get your AWOL charges dropped—and what factors courts consider.
✅ Your options for plea bargains and non-judicial punishment (NJP) to avoid a court-martial.
✅ How to minimize long-term career damage and preserve your military benefits.

You don’t have to go through this alone—and you don’t have to let one mistake define your future. This guide will arm you with the knowledge you need to make the best possible decisions for your case.

Time is Running Out—Take Control of Your Defense Today

AWOL cases move fast, and waiting too long to act can hurt your chances of a favorable outcome. The sooner you get legal representation, the better we can position you for success.

Call us now for a free, confidential consultation. Our military defense attorneys are ready to fight for you—because your career, reputation, and future are worth protecting.

Table of Contents

Why Choose National Security Law Firm for Your Article 86 Defense?

When facing AWOL charges under Article 86, you’re not just up against the military justice system—you’re fighting for your career, your reputation, and your future. A conviction could mean a dishonorable discharge, loss of benefits, confinement, and difficulty finding employment after service. You need an elite legal team that understands how to navigate the complexities of military law, dismantle the prosecution’s case, and build the strongest possible defense.

At National Security Law Firm, we don’t just defend service members—we fight relentlessly for their futures. Our team of former JAG officers, military prosecutors, and national security law experts brings unparalleled experience, insider knowledge, and an aggressive, battle-tested approach to defending those charged with AWOL. Whether you’re being investigated, facing a court-martial, or considering your legal options, we have the expertise and resources to tip the scales in your favor.

What Sets Us Apart?

1. A Proven Record of Success in AWOL and UCMJ Cases

• Dismissals, reductions, and favorable plea deals—we’ve helped countless service members protect their records and futures.
• Exclusive focus on military and federal law—our firm isn’t distracted by civilian legal matters; we specialize in the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), court-martial defense, and military discipline cases.
• Recognized legal leaders—our attorneys are known for their aggressive defense strategies and deep knowledge of military law.

2. Former JAG Officers & Military Prosecutors Fighting for You

• We know how the prosecution thinks—because we’ve been in their shoes. Our team includes former military prosecutors and JAG officers who understand exactly how commands, legal officers, and military courts handle AWOL cases.
• Insider knowledge = strategic advantage—we anticipate the government’s tactics, exploit weaknesses in their case, and craft defenses that maximize your chances of a favorable outcome.
• We fight like your career depends on it—because it does.

3. Aggressive, Strategic, and Tailored Defense

• No one-size-fits-all defenses. We analyze every fact, piece of evidence, and procedural flaw to build a customized defense strategy designed for your unique situation.
• We challenge every aspect of the case—we expose weak evidence, procedural mistakes, and command overreach to fight for dismissals or reductions.
• We’re relentless. Whether it’s challenging the evidence, negotiating for a lower charge, or taking the fight to trial, we leave no stone unturned in protecting your future.

4. Nationwide Defense for Service Members in Every Branch

• Stationed stateside or overseas? It doesn’t matter. We defend service members across the U.S. and internationally—no matter where your case is being prosecuted.
• We handle cases at every level, from non-judicial punishment (Article 15) to special and general courts-martial.
• Virtual and in-person consultations available—we make it easy to get expert legal help when you need it most.

5. Transparent Pricing & Flexible Legal Financing

• Flat-fee pricing—no surprise legal bills. We tell you upfront what your defense will cost.
• Legal financing options available—we offer flexible payment plans so you can spread legal costs over 3 to 24 months.
• Your future is too important to let cost stand in the way of a strong defense.

6. A Client-Centered, Results-Driven Approach

• You are more than just a case file. We treat every client with respect, dedication, and personalized attention.
• We keep you informed. Military legal proceedings can be confusing—we ensure you understand every option and strategy available to you.
• We are in your corner. From day one, we are committed to protecting your rights, your career, and your reputation.

When the Stakes Are High, You Need the Best Military Defense Team in Your Corner

An AWOL charge doesn’t have to define your career or dictate your future. At National Security Law Firm, we fight with the same intensity and strategic precision as an elite military unit—because we know what’s at stake for you.

Statutory Text of UCMJ Article 86: Absence Without Leave (AWOL)

Article 86 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) governs offenses related to unauthorized absence from duty, commonly referred to as being “Absent Without Leave” or AWOL. This article is essential for maintaining military discipline and ensuring that service members fulfill their responsibilities. The statutory text of Article 86 reads as follows:

“Any member of the armed forces who, without authority—

1. Fails to go to his appointed place of duty at the time prescribed;
2. Goes from that place; or
3. Absents himself or remains absent from his unit, organization, or place of duty at which he is required to be at the time prescribed; shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.”

Purpose and Scope of Article 86

The purpose of Article 86 is to enforce accountability, discipline, and operational readiness across all branches of the armed forces. By criminalizing unauthorized absences, this article ensures that every service member remains dependable and fulfills their assigned duties, which are critical to the success of military operations.

The statute applies to a wide range of situations, including but not limited to:

• Failure to Report: Not showing up to an assigned place of duty at the specified time.
• Leaving an Assigned Post: Departing from the place of duty without proper authorization.
• Extended Absences: Remaining absent without permission for any period, whether hours, days, or weeks.

Key Terminology in the Statutory Text

1. “Without Authority”: This phrase refers to absences that lack approval from a superior officer or chain of command. It distinguishes AWOL from authorized absences such as leave, liberty, or temporary duty orders.
2. “Appointed Place of Duty”: This encompasses any location where a service member is ordered to be, including barracks, formations, workstations, or deployments. The “appointed place” can also include virtual assignments or off-base duties if prescribed by orders.
3. “Fails to Go”: This phrase addresses situations where a service member does not report to their designated duty location at the required time, regardless of intent or duration of the absence.
4. “Goes from That Place”: This provision targets instances where a service member leaves their duty station without authorization after reporting initially.
5. “Remains Absent”: This addresses prolonged unauthorized absences. The duration of absence can affect the severity of punishment, especially if it transitions to the more serious charge of desertion under Article 85.
6. “As a Court-Martial May Direct”: This phrase grants the court-martial discretion to determine appropriate penalties, taking into account the specific circumstances, the duration of the absence, and the impact on military operations.

Contextual Interpretation of Article 86

Article 86 provides the legal framework for addressing unauthorized absences in all branches of the U.S. military. While the text appears straightforward, its application can be complex, as courts-martial must consider factors such as:

• The intent behind the absence.
• The impact on the service member’s unit or mission.
• Whether the absence caused any disruption to military operations.

Military courts also distinguish between minor infractions, such as being late for formation, and serious violations, such as extended absences or repeated offenses. In cases of prolonged absence (30 days or more), the charge may escalate to desertion under Article 85, which carries more severe penalties.

By criminalizing unauthorized absences, Article 86 underscores the importance of accountability and the chain of command in maintaining the discipline essential to military success.

Elements of the Offense for UCMJ Article 86: Absence Without Leave (AWOL)

To establish a violation of Article 86, Absence Without Leave (AWOL), the prosecution must prove certain elements beyond a reasonable doubt. These elements vary depending on the specific type of AWOL charge but collectively define the circumstances under which a service member is considered to have violated the article. Below are the primary categories of offenses under Article 86 and their respective elements.

1.Failure to Go to an Appointed Place of Duty

For a charge of failing to report to an appointed place of duty, the prosecution must prove:

1. That a certain authority appointed a specific time and place of duty for the accused;
2. That the accused knew of that time and place of duty; and
3. That the accused, without authority, failed to go to the appointed place of duty at the specified time.

Key Considerations:

• The appointed place of duty may include a formation, workspace, or other designated location.
• The accused’s knowledge of the order is critical, requiring the prosecution to demonstrate that the individual was properly informed.
• Intent is not required; the failure to be present without authorization constitutes the offense.

2.Going from Appointed Place of Duty

For a charge of leaving a duty station without authorization, the prosecution must prove:

1. That the accused had been at an appointed place of duty; and
2. That the accused, without authority, went from that place.

Key Considerations:

• This offense applies even if the accused initially reported to the duty station but departed without authorization.
• The prosecution does not need to show intent, only that the departure was unauthorized.

3.Absence from Unit, Organization, or Place of Duty

For a charge of absence from the unit, organization, or place of duty, the prosecution must prove:

1. That the accused was required to be at a specific unit, organization, or place of duty at a certain time;
2. That the accused knew of the requirement; and
3. That the accused, without authority, absented themselves or remained absent from their unit, organization, or place of duty at the specified time.

Key Considerations:

• The offense is not limited to failure to appear initially; it also includes remaining absent for an extended period.
• The absence may range from minutes to days, with longer absences potentially escalating the severity of the charge.

4.Unauthorized Absence Over 30 Days

For unauthorized absences lasting more than 30 days, the prosecution must prove the same elements as above while also emphasizing the extended duration. Prolonged absence may lead to additional charges, such as desertion under Article 85, if intent to permanently abandon duties is inferred.

Burden of Proof

The burden of proof lies entirely on the prosecution to demonstrate each element beyond a reasonable doubt. The defense may challenge these elements by arguing:

• Lack of knowledge of the appointed place or time.
• Authorization for the absence (e.g., implied or emergency leave).
• Mistake of fact, such as misunderstanding the orders.

Legal Thresholds and Implications

The elements of Article 86 underscore the military’s strict expectations for accountability and presence. Whether an offense involves being late, leaving prematurely, or failing to return, each element ensures a clear and structured approach to determining violations.

By proving these elements, military courts can hold service members accountable for unauthorized absences while distinguishing between minor infractions and more severe breaches of duty. Conversely, the defense can focus on negating any of these elements to secure a dismissal or reduction of charges.

Common Scenarios Leading to AWOL Charges

AWOL charges under Article 86 often stem from a variety of personal and professional situations. While each case is unique, some of the most common scenarios include:

• Family Emergencies: A sudden illness, death, or other crisis involving a loved one may lead a service member to leave their post without proper authorization.
• Misunderstanding of Orders: Miscommunication or confusion about reporting dates, locations, or responsibilities can result in an unintentional absence.
• Transportation Issues: Missed flights, vehicle breakdowns, or other travel disruptions can cause delays in returning to duty.
• Mental Health Challenges: Stress, anxiety, depression, or other mental health struggles may lead a service member to leave their post to seek relief or avoid duty temporarily.
• Disputes with Leadership: Frustration or conflict with superiors or within the unit may prompt a service member to leave without authorization.
• Overlooked Requirements: Forgetting or failing to attend mandatory drills, formations, or training sessions is common among reservists or National Guard members.

Understanding the reasons behind an absence can play a critical role in building a defense. Addressing these factors with the help of an experienced attorney can help mitigate charges and achieve a more favorable outcome.

The Difference Between AWOL and Desertion (Article 85)

While AWOL (Article 86) and Desertion (Article 85) both involve a service member’s unauthorized absence, they are distinct offenses with different implications. AWOL applies when a service member is temporarily absent from their assigned duty without permission but with the intent to return. In contrast, Desertion occurs when a service member is absent with the intent to permanently avoid their duties or leave the military altogether.

The key factor distinguishing the two is intent:

• AWOL: The absence is temporary, and the service member plans to return to duty.
• Desertion: The absence is permanent, or the intent is to shirk duty during times of war or avoid hazardous assignments.

Desertion is treated as a far more severe offense, often resulting in harsher punishments, including dishonorable discharge and significant confinement time. Understanding this distinction is critical, as intent plays a significant role in determining how the case will be charged and prosecuted. If you’re facing AWOL or desertion charges, securing experienced legal representation is vital to ensuring your intent is clearly communicated and defended.

Potential Punishments for Violating Article 86: Absence Without Leave (AWOL)

Violations of Article 86, Absence Without Leave (AWOL), are taken seriously under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), as they undermine military readiness, discipline, and unit cohesion. Punishments for AWOL offenses vary significantly based on the specific circumstances, including the duration of the absence, the impact on the unit, and the intent of the accused. Below is an overview of potential punishments for different types of Article 86 violations.

1.Failure to Go to Appointed Place of Duty

This offense typically involves a brief, unauthorized absence and is considered less severe compared to other forms of AWOL.

Maximum Punishment:

• Confinement: Up to 1 month
• Forfeiture of Pay: Up to 2/3 pay for 1 month
• Reduction in Rank: Possible reduction to the lowest enlisted grade (E-1)
• Reprimand or Extra Duties: Discretionary administrative penalties

Considerations:
Minor infractions, such as being late to a formation, may result in non-judicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15 rather than a court-martial.

2.Leaving Appointed Place of Duty

Departing from an assigned duty location without authorization is treated more seriously than failing to report initially.

Maximum Punishment:

• Confinement: Up to 3 months
• Forfeiture of Pay: Up to 2/3 pay for 3 months
• Reduction in Rank: Possible reduction to E-1
• Administrative Action: Written reprimand or extra duty

Considerations:
If the absence caused a disruption to operations or left duties unfulfilled, penalties may increase.

3.Unauthorized Absence from Unit or Place of Duty

Absences lasting several hours or days are viewed as more egregious, particularly if they cause operational difficulties or reflect an intentional disregard for military obligations.

Maximum Punishment:

• Confinement: Up to 6 months
• Forfeiture of Pay: Up to 2/3 pay for 6 months
• Reduction in Rank: Possible reduction to E-1
• Dishonorable Discharge: If accompanied by aggravating factors

Considerations:
Extended absences may lead to a summary, special, or general court-martial, depending on the duration and impact on unit readiness.

4.Absence Over 30 Days

AWOL lasting more than 30 days is treated as a significant violation, often with additional charges, such as desertion under Article 85, if intent to permanently abandon duties can be established.

Maximum Punishment:

• Confinement: Up to 1 year
• Forfeiture of Pay: Total forfeiture of all pay and allowances
• Reduction in Rank: Mandatory reduction to E-1
• Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) or Dishonorable Discharge: At court’s discretion

Aggravating Circumstances:

• Being apprehended instead of voluntarily returning to duty
• Absence during deployment or mission-critical operations

5.Unauthorized Absence with Intent to Avoid Hazardous Duty or Deployment

If the AWOL is determined to have been an intentional act to avoid hazardous duty, combat, or deployment, the violation is considered particularly serious.

Maximum Punishment:

• Confinement: Up to 2 years
• Forfeiture of Pay: Total forfeiture of all pay and allowances
• Reduction in Rank: Reduction to E-1
• Dishonorable Discharge: Likely

Considerations:
This offense reflects an intent to undermine the mission and the trust placed in service members.

6.Unauthorized Absence with Significant Operational Impact

When an absence directly impacts the success of a mission or the safety of others, the court may impose harsher penalties.

Maximum Punishment:

• Confinement: Variable, up to 6 months to 1 year
• Forfeiture of Pay: Total or significant forfeiture of pay
• Bad Conduct Discharge or Dishonorable Discharge: Likely

Non-Judicial Punishment (NJP) Options

In less severe cases, commanders may opt for NJP under Article 15, which allows for more lenient, administrative penalties:

• Confinement: Not applicable
• Reduction in Rank: Limited by the commander’s rank
• Extra Duty: Up to 45 days
• Restriction to Base: Up to 60 days
• Forfeiture of Pay: Partial forfeiture for up to 2 months

NJP allows for corrective action without a formal court-martial, sparing the service member from a criminal record.

Factors Influencing Sentencing

Aggravating Factors:

• Length of absence
• Impact on unit readiness or mission
• Previous disciplinary record
• Absence during a critical operation

Mitigating Factors:

• Voluntary return to duty
• Lack of intent to abandon post
• Personal or family emergencies
• Exemplary prior service record

Penalties for violating Article 86 range from mild administrative actions to severe criminal convictions, depending on the circumstances of the absence. Service members facing AWOL charges should act promptly to secure experienced legal representation.

Administrative vs. Judicial Actions for AWOL

When a service member faces AWOL (Article 86) charges, the military can handle the case either administratively or through judicial action, depending on the severity and circumstances of the absence.

Administrative Actions

Administrative measures are typically used for less serious AWOL cases, such as brief absences or first-time offenses. These actions can include:

• Counseling or Reprimand: A formal warning or documentation of the offense in the service member’s personnel file.
• Non-Judicial Punishment (NJP): Often referred to as Article 15 proceedings, NJP can result in penalties such as extra duties, reduction in rank, or forfeiture of pay without the need for a court-martial.
• Administrative Discharge: In cases of repeated or prolonged AWOL, the military may initiate a separation from service, which could lead to a General or Other Than Honorable discharge.

Judicial Actions

Judicial actions are pursued when the absence is prolonged, intentional, or results in significant harm to military operations. These cases are handled through a court-martial and may result in:

• Confinement: Time served in a military correctional facility.
• Forfeiture of Pay: Loss of salary during and after the absence.
• Dishonorable Discharge: A permanent mark on the service member’s record with significant long-term consequences.

The military considers factors such as the length of the absence, the service member’s intent, and the impact on unit readiness when deciding how to proceed. Working with a qualified military defense attorney can make a significant difference in determining whether a case is handled administratively or judicially, as well as in mitigating potential consequences.

Defenses to Article 86: Absence Without Leave (AWOL)

Defending against charges under Article 86, Absence Without Leave (AWOL), requires a thorough understanding of the specific circumstances that led to the alleged offense. The prosecution must prove certain elements beyond a reasonable doubt, and any gaps in their case or valid explanations for the absence can form the basis of a strong defense. Below are key defenses commonly raised in Article 86 cases:

1.Lack of Intent

Overview:

For an Article 86 conviction, the prosecution must show that the accused intentionally failed to report to their appointed place of duty or intentionally left without authorization. Lack of intent is a strong defense when the absence was unintentional or due to circumstances beyond the service member’s control.

Examples:

• Unavoidable Circumstances: Severe weather, transportation breakdown, or medical emergencies that made it impossible to report to duty.
• Misunderstanding of Orders: The accused reasonably believed they were authorized to be absent due to unclear or miscommunicated orders.

Key Evidence:

• Testimony from witnesses who can corroborate the events.
• Documentation, such as hospital records, repair invoices, or weather reports.

2.Mistake of Fact

Overview:

This defense applies when the accused acted under a mistaken belief that they were authorized to be absent or misunderstood the time, date, or location of their required duty.

Examples:

• Wrong Reporting Time: The accused misunderstood a report time due to conflicting information in official communications.
• Confusion About Leave Authorization: The accused believed they had approved leave but were later informed otherwise.

Key Evidence:

• Official communications showing ambiguities or errors.
• Witness testimony from superiors or clerks who handled leave authorizations.

3.Voluntary Return to Duty

Overview:

A voluntary return to duty, especially within a short time frame, can serve as a mitigating factor and potentially support a defense that the absence was not intended to permanently evade duties.

Examples:

• The accused returned immediately upon realizing their absence was unauthorized.
• The absence occurred due to temporary confusion or an emergency, and the accused made every effort to resume their duties.

Key Evidence:

• Documentation of the voluntary return, such as log entries or statements from superiors.
• Evidence of proactive efforts to resolve the situation, such as calls to superiors or attempts to notify the chain of command.

4.Coercion or Duress

Overview:

If the absence was a result of coercion, threats, or duress, the accused may not be held fully responsible for their actions. This defense argues that the absence occurred under circumstances that placed the accused in immediate fear of harm.

Examples:

• Threats of violence or harm from another service member.
• The accused fled to escape a dangerous or abusive situation.

Key Evidence:

• Testimony from witnesses or medical professionals.
• Records of prior complaints or incidents supporting the claim of coercion or duress.

5.Lack of Notification

Overview:

The prosecution must prove that the accused knew or should have reasonably known about their duty assignment. If the accused was never properly informed of their obligation, this may serve as a defense.

Examples:

• Orders were not communicated through official channels.
• Changes in duty assignments were not properly disseminated.

Key Evidence:

• Emails, written orders, or other communications showing gaps or errors.
• Witness testimony from peers or supervisors who were aware of the communication breakdown.

6.Personal or Family Emergencies

Overview:

Unforeseen emergencies involving the service member or their family can explain and potentially justify the absence.

Examples:

• A medical emergency requiring immediate attention.
• The sudden death or serious illness of a family member that required the accused’s presence.

Key Evidence:

• Medical or death certificates, hospital records, or police reports.
• Statements from family members, medical personnel, or other witnesses.

7.Mental Health or Psychological Issues

Overview:

Mental health conditions that impair judgment or decision-making may serve as a defense or mitigating factor.

Examples:

• The accused experienced severe stress, anxiety, or depression that impacted their ability to report to duty.
• The absence occurred during a mental health crisis, such as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) or other conditions.

Key Evidence:

• Psychiatric evaluations or treatment records.
• Testimony from mental health professionals.

8.Improper Command Influence or Investigation

Overview:

Procedural errors or violations of the accused’s rights during the investigation can form the basis for a defense.

Examples:

• Unlawful command influence, where superiors improperly influenced the investigation or decision to charge.
• Incomplete or biased investigations that failed to consider exculpatory evidence.

Key Evidence:

• Documentation of procedural irregularities.
• Testimony from involved parties highlighting improper command actions.

9.Insufficient Evidence

Overview:

The prosecution must prove all elements of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt. If the evidence is circumstantial, inconsistent, or fails to establish the accused’s intent, the defense can argue for dismissal.

Examples:

• No proof that the accused intentionally avoided duty.
• Lack of witnesses or corroborating evidence showing the absence was unauthorized.

Key Evidence:

• Cross-examination of prosecution witnesses to expose inconsistencies.
• Testimony and documentation that challenge the prosecution’s claims.

10.Administrative Resolution Instead of Court-Martial

Overview:

In some cases, the defense can argue that the alleged AWOL is better handled through non-judicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, rather than escalating to a court-martial.

Examples:

• The absence was brief and had minimal impact on the unit.
• The accused has an otherwise clean service record, making administrative action more appropriate.

Key Evidence:

• A strong service record and positive character references.
• A clear explanation of the mitigating circumstances leading to the absence.

Defending against Article 86 charges requires a tailored approach that considers the unique facts and circumstances of each case. By challenging the elements of the offense, presenting mitigating factors, and highlighting procedural errors, service members can build a robust defense. At National Security Law Firm, our experienced military defense attorneys specialize in navigating Article 86 cases, ensuring your rights are protected and working tirelessly to minimize the consequences.

Rehabilitation and Mitigation Post-AWOL

Facing AWOL charges under Article 86 doesn’t have to mean the end of your military career. With the right steps, service members can demonstrate their commitment to rehabilitation and mitigate the consequences of their absence. Courts and commanders often take proactive efforts into account when determining penalties or post-case outcomes.

Steps Toward Rehabilitation and Mitigation

1. Voluntary Return to Duty
   • Returning to your post as soon as possible shows accountability and willingness to correct the situation. The sooner you return, the better your chances of receiving leniency.
2. Acknowledging Responsibility
   • Taking ownership of the absence and showing remorse can help rebuild trust. Acknowledging the mistake without making excuses demonstrates maturity and commitment to military values.
3. Addressing Underlying Causes
   • If personal, mental health, or family issues contributed to the absence, seeking professional support (e.g., counseling or therapy) can show that you’re taking steps to resolve the root causes.
4. Good Military Character Evidence
   • Highlighting prior commendations, strong service history, or testimonials from peers and superiors can help offset the negative impact of an AWOL charge.
5. Participation in Military or Community Programs
   • Volunteering for extra duties, leadership roles, or community service can demonstrate your dedication to improving yourself and serving others.

Benefits of Rehabilitation Efforts

Proactively addressing an AWOL incident can lead to:

• Reduced Sentencing: Courts may impose lighter penalties when rehabilitation is evident.
• Administrative Action Instead of Court-Martial: Demonstrating responsibility can shift the case away from judicial action.
• Preservation of Military Career: A strong commitment to improvement can result in retaining your rank, benefits, and career trajectory.

Rehabilitation and mitigation efforts are about addressing the past and demonstrating one’s value to the military and potential for future service. Taking these steps early can significantly affect the outcome of your case.

How Much Does an Article 86 Lawyer Cost?

At National Security Law Firm (NSLF), we understand the importance of clear and transparent pricing. The cost of representation for an Article 86 AWOL case depends on how the case is resolved:

1. Non-Judicial Punishment (e.g., Article 15 or GOMOR): $3,000–$5,000
   These cases are typically resolved without a court-martial and involve less preparation, making them the most affordable option.
2. Administrative Separation Board: $8,000–$10,000
   If your case escalates to an Administrative Separation Board, the fee ranges from $8,000 to $10,000. However, any fees already paid for Non-Judicial Punishment ($3,000–$5,000) will be credited toward this amount.
3. Courts-Martial: Starting at $15,000
   Courts-martial involve extensive preparation, including thorough investigations, potential expert witnesses, and multiple trial days. Fees start at $15,000 and may increase depending on the case’s complexity.

Factors That Influence Costs
Several factors can drive costs up or down, including:

• Complexity of the Case: More severe charges or multiple allegations can require additional preparation.
• Amount of Evidence: A high volume of evidence or the need for expert analysis can increase costs.
• Investigation Requirements: Complex investigations and witness preparation may result in higher fees.
• Trial Length: The number of trial days can significantly impact costs.

We offer a free 20-minute phone consultation to discuss your case and provide accurate pricing tailored to your situation. Schedule your free consultation today.

For added flexibility, we also offer legal financing options, allowing you to pay in manageable monthly installments over 3 to 24 months. Learn more about financing options here. Let us help you navigate this challenging time with clarity and confidence.

Implications for Your Military Career

A violation of Article 86, Absence Without Leave (AWOL) can have far-reaching consequences for your military career, impacting your current status, future opportunities, and long-term benefits. Whether your absence was brief or prolonged, the repercussions of an AWOL charge can be severe and life-altering.

1. Separation from the Military

• Administrative Discharge: In cases where the AWOL is considered minor or involves mitigating circumstances, you may face an administrative discharge. This can result in a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge or, in more severe cases, an Other Than Honorable (OTH) discharge.
• Dismissal or Dishonorable Discharge: Prolonged absences or aggravating factors, such as being declared a deserter, can lead to Dishonorable Discharge or Dismissal for officers. These forms of separation carry a significant stigma and permanently affect your ability to receive military benefits or secure civilian employment.

2. Loss of Rank and Pay

• Reduction in Rank: Even if you remain in service, a conviction or administrative action for AWOL can lead to a reduction in rank. This impacts both your pay and your ability to advance in the future.
• Forfeiture of Pay and Allowances: Service members found guilty of AWOL often lose pay for the time they were absent, and in some cases, may face additional forfeitures as part of the punishment.

3. Impact on Career Advancement

• Promotion Eligibility: An AWOL charge can make you ineligible for promotions. A permanent record of misconduct reflects poorly in Enlisted Record Briefs (ERBs) or Officer Record Briefs (ORBs), likely halting your career progression.
• Removal from Leadership Roles: AWOL charges often result in loss of command or leadership positions. Superiors are unlikely to entrust critical responsibilities to service members with a history of unauthorized absence.

4. Security Clearance Revocation

• Immediate Review of Security Clearance: An AWOL charge can trigger a security clearance investigation, especially if the absence raises concerns about reliability, judgment, or loyalty. Loss of clearance may lead to reassignment or discharge for members whose roles require it.
• Long-Term Consequences: Even after completing punishment, clearance issues can persist, affecting both military assignments and post-service civilian opportunities in defense-related industries.

5. Damage to Reputation and Unit Cohesion

• Loss of Trust: AWOL charges damage trust between you and your chain of command, peers, and subordinates. This breach of trust can result in isolation within your unit and a diminished ability to rebuild professional relationships.
• Impact on Unit Morale: Absences disrupt operations and affect morale, especially if your role is critical. This impact may lead to strained relationships and reduced confidence in your abilities as a team member or leader.

6. Loss of Benefits

• Veterans Affairs (VA) Benefits: A discharge categorized as OTH or Dishonorable may disqualify you from receiving VA benefits, including healthcare, education, and housing assistance. This can be a devastating blow to service members who rely on these benefits for post-service stability.
• Retirement and Pension: For long-serving members, an AWOL charge that results in dismissal may lead to the loss of retirement eligibility and pension benefits, regardless of how close you are to completing your service requirement.

7. Challenges in Reenlistment

• Barred from Reenlistment: Service members found guilty of AWOL may be flagged as ineligible for reenlistment. This effectively ends your military career, even if your service record was otherwise commendable.
• Waiver Requirements: In rare cases where reenlistment is possible, you may be required to obtain waivers or demonstrate extraordinary rehabilitation efforts, making the process significantly more challenging.

8. Civilian Career Impact

• Difficulty Finding Employment: A negative discharge resulting from an AWOL conviction can follow you into civilian life. Many employers view misconduct in the military as a reflection of reliability and character, which can limit your job opportunities.
• Loss of Leadership Credibility: For service members transitioning to leadership or security-related civilian roles, an AWOL charge undermines your ability to present yourself as a disciplined and trustworthy candidate.

An AWOL charge under Article 86 doesn’t just affect your current standing—it can have lasting repercussions on your entire military career and future opportunities. Understanding these implications underscores the importance of mounting a strong defense to protect your service record, rank, benefits, and reputation.

How Article 86 Affects Veterans’ Benefits

An Article 86 (AWOL) conviction can have significant consequences for a service member’s eligibility for veterans’ benefits, including healthcare, education, and retirement support. The impact depends on the circumstances of the AWOL offense and the character of the service member’s discharge.

Key Factors Affecting Veterans’ Benefits 

1. Character of Discharge
   • Honorable or General Discharge: AWOL incidents that are minor or resolved administratively may still allow service members to receive full veterans’ benefits, especially if their overall service record is strong.
   • Other Than Honorable (OTH) Discharge: More severe AWOL cases, particularly prolonged absences or those involving aggravating factors, can result in an OTH discharge. This may limit or disqualify access to many VA benefits.
   • Dishonorable Discharge: A dishonorable discharge from a court-martial for AWOL typically results in the complete forfeiture of VA benefits, including healthcare, education assistance (GI Bill), and pension eligibility.
2. Length of Absence
   • Short-term AWOL incidents are less likely to affect benefits if they are handled administratively or result in NJP. Prolonged absences, however, are more likely to lead to judicial actions and unfavorable discharge classifications.
3. Impact on Unit or Mission
   • AWOL cases that caused significant disruption to military operations or endangered others are viewed more harshly, increasing the likelihood of a discharge status that adversely affects veterans’ benefits.

Potential Consequences on Specific Benefits

• Healthcare: Eligibility for VA healthcare may be denied for those with an OTH or dishonorable discharge.
• Education Assistance: GI Bill benefits require an honorable discharge; service members with less favorable discharges are typically ineligible.
• Retirement Pay: Lengthy AWOL periods or dismissals can lead to the loss of accrued retirement benefits, even for those nearing retirement.
• Disability Compensation: An OTH or dishonorable discharge can disqualify service members from receiving disability compensation for service-connected injuries.

Restoring Benefits After an Article 86 Incident

1. Discharge Upgrade Requests
   • Service members can apply for a discharge upgrade through a Discharge Review Board. Demonstrating rehabilitation, a strong service record, and extenuating circumstances for the AWOL incident can strengthen a request.
2. Character of Service Determination
   • If an upgrade is denied, the VA may conduct a separate Character of Service Determination to assess eligibility for specific benefits.
3. Legal Representation
   • An experienced military defense attorney can help mitigate the long-term impact of an AWOL conviction, such as working to secure a more favorable discharge or exploring avenues to restore benefits.

Long-Term Civilian Consequences of an Article 86 Violation

A conviction for Article 86, Absence Without Leave (AWOL) can extend beyond your military career, impacting various aspects of your civilian life, including employment opportunities, financial stability, and personal reputation. Whether you received an administrative discharge or faced court-martial, the repercussions of an AWOL charge can follow you long after you leave the military.

1. Employment Challenges

• Stigma of a Negative Discharge: A Dishonorable Discharge or Other Than Honorable (OTH) Discharge on your record is a red flag for civilian employers. Many view it as a reflection of unreliability or lack of discipline, which can make securing a job more difficult.
• Loss of Preference for Federal Jobs: Veterans with less-than-honorable discharges are often ineligible for Veterans’ Preference, a significant advantage when applying for federal government jobs. For those who served in roles requiring clearance or technical skills, this can limit career options significantly.
• Limited Leadership Opportunities: Leadership roles in civilian industries, especially in security, law enforcement, or management, often prioritize candidates with military experience. A record of AWOL can undermine your credibility and ability to leverage your service for these positions.

2. Difficulty Securing Security Clearances

• Impact on Clearance Eligibility: A conviction under Article 86 raises questions about reliability, loyalty, and trustworthiness, key factors in obtaining or maintaining a security clearance. This can severely limit opportunities in defense contracting, government roles, or any field requiring background checks.
• Long-Term Consequences: Even if you rehabilitate your professional reputation, the impact of losing clearance can persist, restricting access to high-paying positions in industries related to your military expertise.

3. Financial Implications

• Loss of VA Benefits: A discharge categorized as OTH or Dishonorable may disqualify you from receiving Veterans Affairs (VA) benefits, including healthcare, education, and housing assistance. These benefits often provide a crucial safety net for transitioning service members.
• Reduced Earning Potential: Without access to education benefits like the GI Bill, you may face challenges in furthering your education or acquiring certifications, which can limit career advancement and earning potential in civilian life.

4. Social and Community Stigma

• Reputation in Civilian Communities: The stigma of an AWOL conviction can extend into personal and professional relationships, especially in communities that value military service. This can lead to feelings of isolation and difficulty integrating into veteran or civic groups.
• Impact on Veterans’ Organizations: Membership in veterans’ organizations or access to veteran-specific support networks may be limited for those with a negative discharge, further isolating you from valuable resources.

5. Difficulty with International Travel

• Visa Restrictions: Some countries have strict visa policies that consider criminal or military convictions when approving travel or work permits. A court-martial conviction for AWOL can result in travel restrictions, complicating international employment or personal plans.
• Challenges with Immigration or Residency Applications: For individuals seeking dual citizenship or residency in another country, a conviction can lead to increased scrutiny or outright denial of applications.

6. Barriers to Professional Licensing

• Licensure Denials: Professions requiring licensing—such as law, healthcare, or accounting—often require disclosure of military discharges or convictions. A negative discharge can result in delayed licensure, additional scrutiny, or outright denial.
• Ongoing Disclosure Requirements: Even if a license is granted, some professions require ongoing disclosures during renewals. This can result in recurring challenges to maintaining a professional career.

7. Emotional and Psychological Consequences

• Loss of Identity and Purpose: Many veterans struggle with transitioning to civilian life. A conviction for AWOL can compound these struggles by creating feelings of failure, shame, and loss of identity tied to military service.
• Mental Health Challenges: The stigma and practical barriers caused by an AWOL conviction can lead to stress, anxiety, and depression, particularly for veterans who face rejection or limited opportunities in civilian life.

8. Limited Access to Post-Military Support

• Veterans’ Support Programs: Many veteran-specific programs and non-profits cater to those with honorable service records. A negative discharge may disqualify you from these resources, limiting access to support for career development, mental health, or financial assistance.
• Challenges in Rebuilding Networks: Veterans often rely on their military networks for post-service opportunities. A record of AWOL can make it harder to leverage these connections, as some may view the incident as a breach of trust.

9. Long-Term Legal Implications

• Civilian Background Checks: While a military conviction is not the same as a civilian criminal record, it can still appear during thorough background investigations for sensitive or high-profile roles. This can deter employers and make re-entering the workforce more challenging.
• Difficulty Expunging Records: Unlike civilian convictions, military records are generally not subject to expungement, meaning an AWOL conviction may remain a permanent part of your record.

The long-term civilian consequences of an Article 86 violation can be profound, impacting your financial stability, career opportunities, and personal reputation. Understanding these potential challenges underscores the importance of addressing AWOL charges with a robust defense to protect both your military and civilian futures.

Possible Outcomes and Plea Bargaining Options for Article 86 Violations

When facing charges under Article 86, Absence Without Leave (AWOL), the potential outcomes can vary widely depending on the circumstances of the case, the length and nature of the absence, and the mitigating factors presented during the trial. In many cases, plea bargaining can offer an opportunity to resolve the charges with reduced penalties or alternative outcomes. Below, we outline the possible outcomes and plea options for Article 86 cases.

1. Full Acquittal

• Outcome: A full acquittal means the court-martial determines that the prosecution failed to prove your guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and all charges are dismissed.
• How It’s Achieved: A strong defense that demonstrates lack of intent, mitigating circumstances, or errors in the prosecution’s case can result in an acquittal. This is the best possible outcome as it preserves your military record and future career opportunities.
• Likelihood: This is achievable if the absence was unintentional, authorized in some capacity, or due to compelling circumstances, and the defense successfully counters the prosecution’s evidence.

2. Reduction in Charges

• Outcome: The court or prosecution agrees to reduce the Article 86 charges to a lesser offense, such as an administrative violation or an Article 92 violation (Failure to Obey an Order or Regulation).
• Benefits: Lesser charges typically carry reduced penalties, such as reprimands or forfeiture of pay, rather than dismissal or confinement. This outcome may also limit long-term consequences on your military record.
• How It’s Achieved: This often occurs during plea negotiations when the defense highlights mitigating factors, such as a short absence, valid reasons for the AWOL, or an otherwise exemplary service record.

3. Conviction with Mitigated Sentencing

• Outcome: The court finds you guilty of the AWOL charges, but mitigating factors result in a lighter sentence.
• Possible Sentences:
  • Reduction in rank
  • Forfeiture of pay or allowances
  • Confinement for a limited period
  • Reprimand or probation instead of dismissal
• How It’s Achieved: Demonstrating remorse, providing evidence of personal hardships, or proactively seeking counseling or rehabilitation can lead to a reduced sentence.

4. Non-Judicial Punishment (NJP)

• Outcome: Instead of facing a court-martial, your case is handled through Non-Judicial Punishment (NJP), such as an Article 15 hearing.
• Benefits: NJP penalties, like extra duties, restriction to base, or pay forfeiture, are less severe than a court-martial conviction. NJP avoids a criminal conviction, helping to preserve your military and civilian records.
• How It’s Achieved: Negotiating with your command to resolve the matter administratively instead of escalating to a court-martial. Strong mitigating evidence and a willingness to accept responsibility are key to securing this outcome.

5. Conditional Discharge

• Outcome: You agree to leave the military under a conditional discharge, such as a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge, in lieu of facing a court-martial.
• Benefits:
  • Avoids criminal conviction and confinement
  • May preserve eligibility for some veterans’ benefits
  • Limits long-term consequences on your civilian career
• How It’s Achieved: Your attorney negotiates with the prosecution or command to accept a discharge in exchange for dropping court-martial charges.

6. Dismissal from the Military

• Outcome: In more serious cases, you may face a dismissal (for officers) or a dishonorable discharge (for enlisted personnel).
• Consequences:
  • Loss of all military benefits
  • Permanent mark on your record, severely impacting civilian opportunities
• How It’s Achieved: This typically occurs in cases involving prolonged or repeated absences, or where the AWOL resulted in significant harm to military operations.

7. Alternative Sentencing Agreements

• Outcome: The court-martial or command agrees to impose alternative punishments, such as counseling, community service, or probation.
• Benefits: Alternative sentencing avoids more severe penalties like confinement or dismissal and can help demonstrate rehabilitation and accountability.
• How It’s Achieved: Your attorney can argue for alternative measures based on your personal circumstances, showing a commitment to improving behavior and preventing future issues.

8. Plea Bargains

• What Is a Plea Bargain?
  • A negotiated agreement between the defense and prosecution where you plead guilty to a lesser charge or accept responsibility in exchange for reduced penalties.
• Common Plea Bargain Outcomes:
  • Pleading guilty to a shorter period of AWOL or a lesser offense
  • Agreeing to administrative punishment instead of court-martial
  • Reduced sentencing recommendations from the prosecution
• How Plea Bargains Are Negotiated:
  • Highlight mitigating circumstances, such as family emergencies, mental health struggles, or other factors that contributed to the absence.
  • Emphasize your service record, character references, and proactive steps to address underlying issues.

9. Voluntary Return to Duty

• Outcome: If you return voluntarily before being apprehended, this can positively impact your case.
• Benefits: Voluntary return shows accountability and may result in reduced charges or penalties.
• How It’s Achieved: Reporting back to your command as soon as possible and cooperating fully can demonstrate your willingness to make amends, which can be used during plea negotiations.

Factors Influencing Outcomes

• Length of Absence: Shorter absences, especially those lasting less than 30 days, are more likely to result in reduced charges or alternative resolutions.
• Reason for Absence: Valid reasons, such as medical emergencies or family crises, can mitigate the severity of the charges.
• Service Record: A history of commendable service and good conduct can lead to more favorable outcomes during plea negotiations or sentencing.
• Impact on Unit Operations: If the AWOL did not disrupt unit operations significantly, the penalties may be less severe.

Impact of Aggravating and Mitigating Factors on Article 86 Cases

The outcome of an Article 86, Absence Without Leave (AWOL) case is heavily influenced by both aggravating and mitigating factors. These factors play a crucial role in determining the severity of the charges, the penalties imposed, and whether the case is resolved administratively or escalated to a court-martial.

Aggravating Factors

Aggravating factors increase the perceived severity of the offense and may lead to harsher punishments. Common aggravating factors include:

1. Length of Absence: Extended periods of AWOL, particularly those exceeding 30 days, are considered more serious. If the absence exceeds 30 days and results in being classified as a deserter, the penalties are significantly increased.
2. Operational Impact: If your absence disrupted unit readiness, delayed a mission, or placed additional burdens on your fellow service members, the command is likely to pursue more severe actions.
3. Prior Disciplinary Record: A history of disciplinary issues or previous instances of AWOL can demonstrate a pattern of misconduct, leading to harsher penalties.
4. Intentional Absence to Avoid Duties: If the AWOL was motivated by a desire to avoid hazardous duties, deployment, or an assigned task, this can be viewed as an intentional dereliction of duty, exacerbating the offense.
5. Negative Actions During AWOL: Engaging in criminal activity or behavior that brings disrepute to the military while AWOL can further aggravate the charges.

Mitigating Factors

Mitigating factors can reduce the perceived severity of the offense and may lead to leniency in sentencing or the resolution of the case through non-judicial measures. Examples of mitigating factors include:

1. Short Duration: Brief periods of AWOL, especially those lasting less than 24 hours, are generally viewed as less serious, particularly if they did not impact military operations.
2. Compelling Personal Circumstances: Family emergencies, medical issues, or other urgent personal matters that contributed to the absence can mitigate the seriousness of the charges.
3. Voluntary Return: Returning to duty voluntarily, without being apprehended, demonstrates accountability and can positively influence the case outcome.
4. Clean Service Record: A history of exemplary service, commendations, or a strong work ethic can demonstrate that the AWOL incident was an anomaly.
5. Mental Health Issues: Mental health struggles, such as depression, anxiety, or PTSD, that contributed to the absence may be considered mitigating factors if appropriately documented and presented.
6. Cooperation and Remorse: Demonstrating genuine remorse, cooperating with investigators, and taking proactive steps to address underlying issues can influence sentencing or case resolution.

How Aggravating and Mitigating Factors Are Evaluated

The evaluation of aggravating and mitigating factors is typically conducted by your chain of command, investigators, and, if applicable, the court-martial panel. They will consider:

• Evidence and Documentation: Supporting evidence, such as medical records, character references, or documented emergencies, is essential to substantiate mitigating factors.
• Command Discretion: Commanders often have significant discretion in handling AWOL cases and may weigh mitigating factors more heavily to avoid formal court-martial proceedings.
• Legal Advocacy: A skilled military defense attorney can highlight mitigating factors and challenge aggravating claims to reduce the severity of the case.

Common Mistakes to Avoid in Article 86 AWOL Cases

Facing charges under Article 86, Absence Without Leave (AWOL), can have serious consequences for your military career and personal life. Avoiding common mistakes is essential to protecting your rights, minimizing penalties, and achieving the best possible outcome. Below are the most frequent missteps and how to steer clear of them.

1. Underestimating the Seriousness of AWOL Charges

Mistake: Many service members assume that being AWOL is a minor offense that won’t result in severe consequences, especially for short-term absences.

Why It Matters: Even a brief absence can escalate into significant disciplinary action, including a court-martial, depending on the circumstances. AWOL charges can also lead to long-term career and civilian consequences.

Avoid It: Treat any AWOL charge seriously. Consult a military defense attorney early to understand the potential impact and develop a proactive defense strategy.

2. Failing to Seek Legal Representation Early

Mistake: Attempting to resolve an AWOL case without professional legal help, believing that cooperating with your chain of command will suffice.

Why It Matters: Your command’s priority is to maintain discipline, not necessarily to protect your rights. Without an advocate, you may unknowingly waive legal protections or fail to present mitigating factors effectively.

Avoid It: Engage a qualified military defense attorney as soon as you become aware of the charges. An experienced lawyer can guide you through the process, protect your rights, and negotiate the best possible resolution.

3. Making Inconsistent or Self-Incriminating Statements

Mistake: Offering inconsistent explanations for your absence or making statements without understanding the legal implications.

Why It Matters: Inconsistent or self-incriminating statements can weaken your defense and provide evidence that supports the prosecution’s case.

Avoid It: Remain silent until you’ve consulted with an attorney. Avoid discussing the case with your chain of command or peers, as even casual comments can be used against you.

4. Ignoring Aggravating Factors

Mistake: Failing to address aggravating factors, such as the length of absence, operational impact, or prior disciplinary issues, which can worsen the charges.

Why It Matters: Aggravating factors increase the perceived severity of the offense and can lead to harsher penalties, including a bad conduct discharge or confinement.

Avoid It: Work with your attorney to identify and address aggravating factors early. Provide context for your absence and present evidence that minimizes their impact.

5. Overlooking Mitigating Factors

Mistake: Neglecting to highlight personal or contextual circumstances, such as family emergencies or mental health struggles, that contributed to the absence.

Why It Matters: Mitigating factors can significantly influence the severity of the penalties or lead to reduced charges.

Avoid It: Gather documentation, such as medical records or character references, to support your case. A skilled attorney can help present these factors effectively to your command or court-martial panel.

6. Failing to Voluntarily Return to Duty

Mistake: Waiting to be apprehended instead of voluntarily returning to duty after realizing the mistake.

Why It Matters: Voluntary return demonstrates accountability and reduces the perception of intentional misconduct. Being apprehended can make the case appear more serious.

Avoid It: Return to duty as soon as possible and consult with an attorney to guide your next steps.

7. Assuming “All or Nothing” Defense Strategies

Mistake: Refusing to consider plea deals or alternative resolutions in an effort to fight the charges entirely.

Why It Matters: In some cases, an “all or nothing” approach can backfire, especially if the evidence strongly supports the charges. This may result in harsher penalties than necessary.

Avoid It: Be open to plea deals or alternative resolutions, such as non-judicial punishment (NJP). An attorney can help negotiate terms that minimize the long-term impact on your career.

8. Failing to Address Underlying Issues

Mistake: Ignoring personal or professional issues that led to the AWOL incident, such as mental health struggles, family crises, or workplace conflicts.

Why It Matters: Courts-martial may view unresolved issues as a sign of ongoing risk, increasing the likelihood of severe penalties.

Avoid It: Seek counseling or other support to address underlying issues. Proactively demonstrating a commitment to improvement can favorably influence your case.

9. Engaging in Further Misconduct During Proceedings

Mistake: Displaying unprofessional behavior, violating orders, or committing additional infractions while your AWOL case is pending.

Why It Matters: Additional misconduct can significantly damage your defense, undermine your credibility, and result in harsher sentencing.

Avoid It: Maintain exemplary behavior throughout the process, follow all orders, and work closely with your attorney to ensure compliance with military protocols.

10. Neglecting the Long-Term Consequences

Mistake: Focusing solely on the immediate penalties without considering the long-term impact on your military career, civilian opportunities, and reputation.

Why It Matters: AWOL convictions can lead to separation, loss of benefits, and difficulties in civilian employment.

Avoid It: Understand the full scope of the consequences and work with your attorney to pursue a resolution that minimizes long-term harm.

How to Maximize the Outcome of Your Article 86 AWOL Case

Facing Article 86, Absence Without Leave (AWOL) charges can be overwhelming, but with a proactive approach and the right legal strategy, you can maximize your chances of achieving the best possible outcome. Whether your goal is dismissal, reduced charges, or minimal penalties, here are key steps to take:

1. Retain an Experienced Military Defense Attorney

Why It’s Important: Article 86 cases are nuanced, requiring a deep understanding of military law and the subjective factors that influence AWOL charges. A skilled attorney can identify weaknesses in the prosecution’s case, present compelling defenses, and negotiate favorable outcomes.

Action Step: Consult a qualified military defense lawyer as soon as possible. Early legal representation ensures your rights are protected from the outset and allows for a strong, well-prepared defense strategy.

2. Voluntarily Return to Duty Promptly

Why It’s Important: Demonstrating accountability by voluntarily returning to duty can significantly improve the perception of your case. It shows the absence was not an intentional or permanent act of defiance.

Action Step: Contact your attorney to plan a prompt return to duty. Ensure that your return is documented properly to highlight your willingness to comply with military obligations.

3. Address Underlying Reasons for Absence

Why It’s Important: Courts-martial and commanders often consider the reasons behind an absence. Demonstrating that your absence was due to mitigating circumstances, such as family emergencies, mental health struggles, or miscommunications, can lead to leniency.

Action Step: Gather documentation, such as medical records, correspondence, or personal testimony, that explains the factors contributing to your absence. Work with your attorney to present this evidence effectively.

4. Highlight Your Service Record and Positive Character

Why It’s Important: A strong service record and positive character references can help frame your absence as an isolated incident rather than a pattern of misconduct.

Action Step: Compile performance evaluations, commendations, and letters of support from superiors, peers, or subordinates. These materials can be powerful evidence of your commitment to military values and professionalism.

5. Cooperate with the Investigation

Why It’s Important: A cooperative attitude during the investigation and proceedings demonstrates professionalism and respect for military processes. This can positively influence the outcome of your case.

Action Step: Work closely with your attorney to ensure you cooperate appropriately while protecting your rights. Avoid making self-incriminating statements or discussing your case without legal counsel present.

6. Present Mitigating Factors

Why It’s Important: Mitigating factors, such as personal hardships, operational pressures, or a misunderstanding of orders, can help reduce the perceived severity of the offense and influence sentencing.

Action Step: Collaborate with your attorney to identify and present mitigating factors. Support these claims with credible evidence, such as witness statements or official documentation.

7. Negotiate for Non-Judicial Punishment (NJP)

Why It’s Important: Resolving your case through non-judicial punishment (NJP), such as an Article 15, may allow you to avoid a court-martial and the long-term consequences of a criminal conviction.

Action Step: Discuss NJP options with your attorney. Your lawyer can advocate for a resolution that minimizes penalties while addressing your command’s concerns about discipline.

8. Be Proactive in Correcting Behavior

Why It’s Important: Demonstrating a commitment to improvement, such as attending counseling or completing training, shows that you take the charges seriously and are working to prevent future issues.

Action Step: Proactively seek counseling, mental health support, or other relevant resources. Document your efforts to show the court-martial or your command that you are taking corrective actions.

9. Consider Plea Bargaining if Appropriate

Why It’s Important: In cases where the evidence against you is strong, negotiating a plea deal can result in reduced charges or lighter sentencing, preserving your career and benefits.

Action Step: Work with your attorney to explore plea options. An experienced lawyer can help negotiate terms that align with your goals while minimizing the impact on your future.

10. Maintain Exemplary Behavior

Why It’s Important: Your conduct during the investigation and trial can impact how your case is perceived. Unprofessional behavior or additional infractions can harm your defense and lead to harsher penalties.

Action Step: Follow all military orders, maintain respect for the process, and demonstrate professionalism throughout the proceedings. Show your chain of command and the court that you are committed to upholding military values.

11. Leverage Aggravating and Mitigating Factors

Why It’s Important: The court will weigh factors such as the length of your absence, operational impact, and prior disciplinary history. Highlighting mitigating factors and addressing aggravating ones can significantly influence the outcome.

Action Step: Collaborate with your attorney to address aggravating factors and emphasize mitigating circumstances. Provide evidence and testimony to support your claims.

12. Prepare for Sentencing Alternatives

Why It’s Important: If a conviction is unavoidable, pursuing alternative sentencing options, such as probation or reduced penalties, can help preserve your military career and benefits.

Action Step: Discuss sentencing alternatives with your attorney. Prepare a strong case to present to the court or your command, highlighting your potential for rehabilitation and continued service.

Maximizing the outcome of your Article 86 case requires a strategic, proactive approach. By working with an experienced military defense attorney, demonstrating accountability, and presenting compelling evidence of mitigating factors, you can build a strong defense and protect your future.

What Makes a Strong or Weak Case for an Article 86 AWOL Defense

The strength of a defense in an Article 86 (AWOL) case depends on several factors, including the evidence presented, the circumstances of the absence, and the ability to challenge the prosecution’s case effectively. Understanding what constitutes a strong or weak case can help you and your attorney build the best possible defense strategy.

Characteristics of a Strong Case

A strong Article 86 defense is built on solid evidence, mitigating circumstances, and proactive legal strategies. Below are key features of a robust defense:

1. Documented Mitigating Factors

Why It’s Strong: If your absence was due to compelling personal or professional reasons, such as a medical emergency, family crisis, or mental health challenges, the court may view your actions in a more sympathetic light.

Example: An officer who left their post to attend to a critically ill family member but promptly returned and reported the situation demonstrates mitigating circumstances.

Defense Action: Provide medical records, witness statements, or other evidence supporting the legitimate reasons for your absence.

2. Lack of Intent to Desert

Why It’s Strong: AWOL charges can escalate to desertion if intent to permanently abandon duty is proven. Showing that your absence was unintentional or temporary undermines the prosecution’s case.

Example: If you missed your duty because of a miscommunication about your leave dates, it indicates a lack of intent to abandon your post.

Defense Action: Present correspondence, orders, or testimony that highlight confusion or miscommunication.

3. Prompt Return to Duty

Why It’s Strong: Returning to your post voluntarily and as quickly as possible demonstrates accountability and a willingness to fulfill your obligations.

Example: A service member who realized their absence and immediately reported back, even before being contacted by superiors, shows a commitment to resolving the situation.

Defense Action: Document the timeline of your return and any proactive steps taken to address the absence.

4. Strong Military Record and Character References

Why It’s Strong: A history of exemplary service can frame the AWOL incident as an isolated lapse rather than a reflection of poor character or professionalism.

Example: An officer with numerous commendations and no prior disciplinary actions is less likely to be seen as intentionally derelict in their duties.

Defense Action: Gather performance evaluations, awards, and letters of support from superiors and colleagues.

5. Procedural Errors by the Prosecution

Why It’s Strong: Mistakes in the investigation or procedural violations can result in the exclusion of evidence or even dismissal of charges.

Example: If the prosecution fails to properly document the start and end dates of the absence, it weakens their case.

Defense Action: Work with your attorney to identify procedural flaws or gaps in evidence.

6. Cooperation During the Investigation

Why It’s Strong: Demonstrating respect for military procedures and cooperating during the investigation can positively influence the perception of your case.

Example: Answering questions respectfully and complying with orders during the investigation shows professionalism and accountability.

Defense Action: Ensure all interactions with investigators and superiors are professional and documented.

Characteristics of a Weak Case

A weak defense is often characterized by a lack of evidence, unaddressed aggravating factors, or behavior that undermines credibility. Below are key traits of a weak case:

1. Long Duration of Absence Without Justification

Why It’s Weak: Extended periods of absence, especially without valid reasons, can be interpreted as intentional defiance of military obligations.

Example: A service member who was absent for months without contacting their command is likely to face more severe consequences.

Defense Action: Without a documented reason for the absence, the case becomes harder to defend. Always provide any available evidence to explain the duration.

2. Prior Misconduct or Disciplinary Actions

Why It’s Weak: A history of misconduct suggests a pattern of behavior that undermines the defense’s claim that the AWOL incident was an isolated lapse.

Example: A service member with multiple prior reprimands for tardiness or insubordination will have a harder time arguing for leniency.

Defense Action: Address prior incidents openly while focusing on improvements made since those events.

3. Aggravating Factors

Why It’s Weak: Aggravating circumstances, such as abandoning a critical mission or leaving during combat, increase the perceived severity of the offense.

Example: Failing to report for duty in a combat zone endangers others and undermines unit readiness.

Defense Action: Work with your attorney to minimize the impact of aggravating factors by presenting mitigating evidence or context.

4. Disrespect or Noncompliance During Proceedings

Why It’s Weak: Demonstrating a lack of respect for the court-martial process or failing to comply with military orders can damage credibility and worsen sentencing.

Example: A service member who is uncooperative during the investigation or trial risks alienating the court and command.

Defense Action: Always maintain professionalism, follow orders, and work with your attorney to ensure respectful conduct.

5. Lack of Supporting Evidence

Why It’s Weak: Without credible evidence or witnesses to support your defense, the prosecution’s narrative may dominate the case.

Example: Claiming a medical emergency without presenting records or corroborating testimony weakens the defense.

Defense Action: Gather all relevant documentation, even if it is incomplete, and present it with the guidance of your attorney.

6. Perceived Intent to Desert

Why It’s Weak: If the prosecution successfully argues that you intended to permanently abandon duty, the consequences will be severe.

Example: Selling personal belongings or failing to return after repeated orders may be interpreted as intent to desert.

Defense Action: Address any behavior that could be misinterpreted as intent to desert and provide evidence of plans to return to duty.

Key Factors That Determine Case Strength

• Intent: Cases with evidence of unintentional absence (e.g., due to emergencies or confusion) are stronger than those where willful neglect is evident.
• Duration of Absence: Shorter absences are easier to defend than prolonged AWOL periods, especially if you returned voluntarily.
• Operational Impact: Cases involving absence during non-critical times are less severe than those where absence disrupted operations or mission readiness.
• Mitigating vs. Aggravating Factors: A strong case highlights mitigating factors while minimizing or addressing aggravating ones.
• Legal Advocacy: The quality of your defense attorney can significantly influence the outcome, as military law is complex and requires strategic expertise.

A strong defense in Article 86 cases requires preparation, evidence, and skilled legal representation. By demonstrating mitigating circumstances, presenting strong character evidence, and challenging the prosecution’s narrative, you can maximize your chances of a favorable outcome. Conversely, failing to provide credible explanations, address aggravating factors, or secure experienced legal counsel weakens your case and increases the likelihood of severe penalties. At National Security Law Firm, we specialize in building robust defenses for service members facing AWOL charges, ensuring your rights and career are protected.

How to Get Your Article 86 Charges Dismissed

Facing charges under Article 86 of the UCMJ can feel overwhelming, but dismissal is possible with a well-structured defense strategy. Achieving dismissal requires demonstrating flaws in the prosecution’s case, presenting mitigating evidence, and working with skilled legal counsel to challenge the charges. Below are strategies to maximize your chances of getting your Article 86 charges dismissed.

1. Challenge the Prosecution’s Evidence

• Scrutinize Evidence for Inconsistencies: The prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you were absent without authorization. Carefully review all evidence to identify inconsistencies or gaps that can weaken their case.
  • Example: Discrepancies in duty rosters, witness statements, or timeline records.
• Demand Proof of Authorization or Lack Thereof: If there’s ambiguity about whether you had permission to be absent, argue that the prosecution has failed to prove the absence was unauthorized.

2. Demonstrate a Lack of Intent

• Highlight Unintentional Absence: Article 86 charges often hinge on intent. If you can prove that your absence was unintentional or due to misunderstanding, you may argue that the elements of the offense are not met.
  • Example: Showing that you misinterpreted orders or attempted to notify your command but faced communication barriers.
• Provide Supporting Documentation: Use evidence such as emails, text messages, or phone records to demonstrate attempts to notify your superiors or return to duty promptly.

3. Present Mitigating Circumstances

• Personal Hardships or Emergencies: If your absence was due to unavoidable personal circumstances, such as a medical emergency, family crisis, or mental health issue, this may justify dismissal.
  • Example: Medical records or sworn affidavits from healthcare providers showing you were hospitalized or incapacitated during the absence.
• Operational Confusion or Administrative Errors: Prove that the absence resulted from unclear orders, miscommunication, or procedural mistakes within your command.
  • Example: Documentation of conflicting duty schedules or an improperly issued leave denial.

4. Highlight Procedural Errors

• Unlawful Command Influence (UCI): If senior leadership exerted undue influence on the investigation or proceedings, your attorney can argue for dismissal based on compromised fairness.
• Improper Handling of Evidence: If the prosecution obtained evidence unlawfully or failed to follow proper investigative protocols, your attorney can file motions to suppress that evidence.

5. Show Voluntary Return to Duty

• Voluntary Return Weakens the Case: If you returned to duty voluntarily, this can demonstrate that you did not intend to abandon your responsibilities. Courts view voluntary returns more favorably than forced apprehensions.
• Provide Evidence of Return Efforts: Records of your attempts to contact your command, travel receipts, or witness testimony can support this argument.

6. Leverage Positive Service History

• Strong Service Record: Highlight commendations, awards, and positive evaluations to show that the alleged absence was an anomaly in an otherwise exemplary career.
• Character References: Letters from superiors, peers, or subordinates emphasizing your integrity and dedication can cast doubt on the severity of the charges.

7. File a Motion to Dismiss for Insufficient Evidence

• Challenge the Prosecution’s Burden of Proof: The prosecution must prove all elements of the charge beyond a reasonable doubt. If evidence is lacking or unreliable, your attorney can argue that the case does not meet the necessary legal standard.
• Highlight Missing Elements: If the prosecution fails to prove critical elements—such as the specific duration of absence or lack of authorization—you may request dismissal.

8. Argue Ambiguity in the Charge

• Question the Clarity of the Orders: If the orders regarding your duties or location were unclear, you can argue that the absence was due to confusion rather than willful misconduct.
• Cite Precedents: Work with your attorney to reference past cases where similar ambiguities resulted in reduced charges or dismissal.

9. Seek Legal Counsel Immediately

• Why It’s Critical: Military law is complex, and Article 86 cases often involve subjective interpretations of intent and mitigating factors. An experienced military defense attorney can identify weaknesses in the prosecution’s case, craft compelling arguments, and navigate the intricacies of military courts to secure a dismissal.
• How to Get Started: Reach out for a consultation to understand your options and begin building a personalized defense strategy.

Getting Article 86 charges dismissed requires a proactive and well-prepared defense. By challenging the prosecution’s evidence, demonstrating mitigating circumstances, highlighting procedural errors, and leveraging your service record, you can create a compelling case for dismissal.

Special Considerations for Reservists and National Guard Members

Reservists and National Guard members face unique challenges when charged with AWOL (Article 86) violations, given the dual nature of their military commitments and civilian responsibilities. Understanding these nuances is crucial for crafting a strong defense and minimizing career and personal impacts.

1. AWOL vs. Failure to Report for Reservists and National Guard Members

• Failure to Attend Drill or Training: AWOL for Reservists and National Guard members often arises from missing scheduled drills, annual training, or mobilization dates. These absences can trigger disciplinary action under Article 86.
• Civilian Job Conflicts: Unlike active-duty personnel, Reservists and National Guard members may face conflicts between their military obligations and civilian employment, complicating their ability to report.

2. Consequences for Reservists and National Guard Members

• Administrative Actions: Missing drills may result in administrative measures such as written reprimands, loss of drill pay, or involuntary separation from the unit.
• Judicial Actions: Prolonged absences, especially during activation or mobilization, may escalate to court-martial proceedings with more severe penalties, including dismissal and loss of benefits.

3. Impact on Civilian Employment and Benefits

• Employment Protection: Reservists and National Guard members are protected under the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA), but repeated AWOL charges may jeopardize employer trust and long-term job security.
• Loss of Retirement Points: Missing drills or annual training can lead to the loss of retirement points, potentially delaying or reducing retirement benefits.

4. Unique Defense Considerations

• Civilian Hardships: Defense strategies may emphasize civilian job conflicts, medical issues, or family emergencies that contributed to the absence.
• Communication Gaps: Missed notifications or unclear orders, often due to outdated contact information, may serve as a mitigating factor.

5. Strategies for Reservists and National Guard Members

• Early Communication: Promptly addressing the absence with the chain of command can mitigate consequences and demonstrate accountability.
• Documenting Civilian Circumstances: Providing evidence of job-related conflicts, health issues, or family obligations can support a defense.
• Seeking Legal Assistance: Reservists and National Guard members should consult with a military defense attorney who understands the unique dynamics of their service to build a strong case.

Additional Legal Resources for Article 86 Cases

Navigating an Article 86 (Absence Without Leave) charge under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) can be a daunting process. Accessing reliable legal resources can help you better understand the charges, your rights, and potential defense strategies. Below is a curated list of resources to guide you as you address your Article 86 case.

1. Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ)

• The UCMJ serves as the foundation of military law, outlining the legal framework and elements of Article 86. Familiarize yourself with the statutory text and associated articles that may apply to your case.
• Access the full text of the UCMJ via the Legal Information Institute at Cornell Law School: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10

2. Manual for Courts-Martial (MCM)

• The Manual for Courts-Martial (MCM) provides detailed guidance on court-martial procedures, evidence rules, and sentencing guidelines, including those for Article 86 cases.
• Key sections to review include:
  • Rules for Courts-Martial (RCM): Covers procedural requirements for military trials.
  • Military Rules of Evidence (MRE): Governs admissibility of evidence in Article 86 cases.
  • Punitive Articles: Offers detailed analysis and commentary on Article 86.
• The latest MCM is available from the Joint Service Committee on Military Justice: https://jsc.defense.gov/

Ready to Take the Next Step? Let’s Talk

Facing Article 86 AWOL charges can be one of the most daunting challenges of your military career—but you don’t have to face it alone. At National Security Law Firm, we’re here to help you take back control with an aggressive defense, insider knowledge, and a tailored strategy designed to protect your career, reputation, and future.

Time is of the essence. AWOL cases move fast, and every moment you wait could weaken your defense. The sooner you act, the better we can position you for success. Our experienced military defense attorneys are ready to step in, ease your fears, and guide you through every step of the process—from understanding your options to crafting a winning legal strategy.

Here’s How We Can Help Right Now:

• Quick, Free Consultation: Get clear answers, peace of mind, and actionable next steps with no cost or obligation.
• Immediate Strategy Planning: We’ll start building your defense plan during our first conversation so you can feel confident moving forward.
• Nationwide Expertise: No matter where you’re stationed, our attorneys are prepared to represent you with unmatched skill and dedication.
• Affordable Legal Financing: Flexible payment plans let you focus on your case—not your budget.

Take the First Step Toward Securing Your Future

Don’t let an AWOL charge jeopardize everything you’ve worked for. With National Security Law Firm by your side, you’ll have a team of expert advocates fighting to protect your rights, minimize consequences, and help you achieve the best possible outcome.

Act now. Schedule your free consultation today, and by tonight, you’ll have the answers, clarity, and confidence you need to move forward.

National Security Law Firm: It’s Our Turn to Fight for You!