Chapter 5.
Preferring Charges

23. CHARGES IN GENERAL.

    1. Definitions. If, because of the seriousness of the offense, trial by court-martial is required, charges must be preferred--i.e., there must be a formal accusation, just as in state and federal courts a defendant is brought to trial on an indictment or complaint. The charges consist of two parts, the technical "charge" which is a statement of facts and circumstances constituting that violation (par. 24, MCM). Charges are "preferred" by preparing a charge sheet (WD, AGO Form 115) and submitting it to the officer exercising court-martial jurisdiction. See appendices 2, 3, and 4, for forms of completed charge sheets.

    2. By whom charges preferred. Ordinarily, the immediate commanding officer of the accused (i.e., the company or unit commander) will himself prefer charges or cause them to be preferred. Charges, however, may be preferred by others. Any person subject to military law--another officer, an enlisted man, or even a prisoner--has the legal right to prefer charges (par. 25, MCM). It is ordinarily preferable, however, for one who claims that an offense has been committed to inform the immediate commanding officer of the accused of the alleged offense and let him take such action as he deems necessary. Charges cannot be preferred by any one who is not subject to military law, although such a person may bring to the attention of military authorities a supposed offense. The person who prefers charges is known as the "accuser." (par. 60, MCM).

    3. Necessity for inquiry before preferring charges. In the absence of his own personal knowledge, the accuser must make some inquiry into the alleged offenses in order to avoid the preferring of charges on the basis of mere frivolous or malicious accusations, or inaccurate information. Some investigation frequently is necessary to determine just what offense. The person who prefers charges is known as the "accuser" that a report of an assault and battery was not accurate, and that the offender should be charged instead with being drunk and disorderly. The accuser should be sure that there is evidence of all elements of the offense and should know from what witnesses or other sources such evidence

can be obtained. This does not mean that in each case he must make an exhaustive investigation or even interview all possible witnesses. The extent of the inquiry will depend upon the seriousness of the offense, the existence of unusual circumstances, the extent of the accuser's personal knowledge of the facts, or the credibility of the original complaint he receives. In preferring charges the accuser must take an oath that he either has personal knowledge of, or has investigated, the matters stated in the specifications (par. 31, MCM; also Affidavit, WD, AGO Form 115). To avoid swearing falsely, he must at least have made sufficient inquiry into the offense to justify a reasonable belief that the accused committed it.
4. Promptness is preferring charges. Undue delay in preferring charges not only is an injustice to the accused, but has an adverse effect upon the discipline of the command. Although no definite time limit for preferring charges is et by law or regulation, in the ordinary case they should be preferred within 48 hours after the offense is discovered. Promptness is particularly necessary if the accused is in arrest or confinement, since AW 70 requires that "immediate steps" be taken either to try or to release a person who is thus restrained. The accumulation of charges, that is, allowing various unrelated offenses to pass without taking any disciplinary action and then preferring charges for such past offenses if the accused is later guilty of further misconduct, is an improper practice. If an offense warrants punishment at all, punishment should be imposed at once. Punishment long after an offense has occurred hurts rather than helps th3e discipline of the command.

5. Additional charges. After charges originally are preferred, but before the accused is brought to trial, other offenses by the accused may be brought to light. Such offenses may have occurred before the preparation of the charge sheet, but were not known at that time to the accuser, or, as is more frequently the case, they may be committed after the original charges were preferred, as, for example, a breach of arrest or escape from confinement while the accused was awaiting trial. Charges for such offenses should be tried at the same time as the original charges. They are known as "additional charges." They should be preferred separately on a charge sheet designated "additional charges," and forwarded for disposition in conjunction with the original charges. If they are added to the original charge sheet, the affidavit should be amended to show the accuser's knowledge or investigation of the additional charges and specifications. Since the additional charges also must be sworn to by the accuser, the date of the affidavit should be changed, if necessary, so that it will not be prior to the date of the offense alleged in the additional charges.
24. SELECTION OF CHARGE.

    1. General. The first step in preferring charges is to determine the offense or offenses with which the accused

should be charged. That requires an analysis of the facts and a study of the pertinent paragraphs of the Manual for Courts-Martial dealing with the elements of proof of various offenses (ch. XXVI, MCM). In the case of Private Lennie O. Bark (app. 2), for example, Lieutenant Loganby, his company commander, before starting to prepare the charge sheet, first considered what offense Bark committed by deliberately refusing to obey his order to go out to drill. Turning to the Index of the Manual for Courts-Martial under the heading "Disobedience of Orders," he found that the offense of will disobedience in violation of AW 64 was dealt with in paragraph 134b. From the discussion in that paragraph he realized that to constitute willful disobedience there must be an intentional defiance of authority, not mere heedless failure to obey, or nonperformance of a mere routine duty. Checking the elements of proof, he concluded that in this case the offense was committed. Accordingly, he decided to charge willful disobedience in violation of AW 64. Had the facts been different and Bark's disobedience been due to mere neglect, or had the order been a standing order, then he would have decided to charge the offense of failure to obey in violation of AW 96. In the Bark case the selection of the appropriate offense was not difficult. Often there is more doubt as to what offense the accused has committed. For example, wrongful taking and use of property must be distinguished from larceny. To be guilty of larceny, the taker must have an intention permanently to deprive the owner of his rights in the property taken. One who takes a vehicle for a short "joy ride" without permission from the owner hs not committed larceny if the taking is not accompanied with the intent to permanently deprive the owner thereof. Such cases should be charged as wrongful taking and using either under AW 96 if a civilian vehicle, or under AW 94 if a Government vehicle, rather than as larceny under AW 93. If, after careful study of the facts and the Manual for Courts-Martial uncertainty still remains, it is well to consult the staff judge advocate, if possible, before drafting charges.
2. Multiplication of charges. When an offender has committed several violations of the Articles of War, either by a single act or by acts connected with one incident, there may be a temptation to "throw the book at him"--that is, to charge him with every violation, serious or petty, of which he is technically guilty. Such a practice of multiplication of charges is to be avoided (par. 27, MCM). Numerous charges and specifications increase the difficulty of investigation, trial and action on the record. Moreover, the amount of punishment is not increased by charging several different offenses arising out of a single act, since punishment may be imposed with respect to the act in its most serious aspect only. (See par. 80a, MCM.)

3. Combining charges of serious and minor offenses. If a serious offense is charged, charges of minor offenses should not generally be added. (See par. 27, MCM). Thus, to a charge of burglary, there should not be joined a charge of being drunk in quarters; to the charge of sleeping on post,

there should not be added a charge of failure to repair for reveille. The possible additional punishment for the minor offense is inconsequential, and the additional charge is a nuisance at the trial and detracts from the important charge. However, if the minor offense serves to explain the circumstances of the greater offense, it is proper to charge both. For example, if the accused stole $50 from the footlocker of another soldier after having lost heavily in a poker game, the charge of gambling in camp in violation of orders could properly be added to the more serious offense of larceny, since the former explains the motive for the larceny.
4. Joint charges. A joint offense is one committed by two or more persons acting together in pursuance of a common intent. If, for example, soldiers A and B plan to rob a service station, and pursuant to that plan A holds up the proprietor with a gun while B removes money from the till, a joint offense of robbery has been committed. Anyone who aids, abets, the chief offender, e.g., the driver of a getaway car as well as those removing the money at the point of a gun, would be guilty of robbery. Joint offenders may be charged either separately or jointly--that is, a single charge may be made against all par. 27, MCM). The advantage of a joint charge is that all the accused will be tried together at one trial, thus saving time, labor and expense. This must be weighed against possible unfairness to the accused which may result if their defenses are inconsistent or if evidence against one would seriously prejudice another. As to some offenses which can be committed only by two or more acting together, such as mutiny, riot, or conspiracy, the charges should almost always be joint. As to others, such as robbery or assault committed by two or more, the question is one of the most convenient method of trial. There are offenses which can never be joint, such as absence without leave, desertion, or drunkenness (par. 27, MCM). Such offenses cannot be jointly charged.
25. DRAFTING CHARGES AND SPECIFICATIONS.

    1. The charge. The offense or offenses to be charged having been determined, the next step is to draft the charges and specifications. The charge is simply a statement of the Article of War which was violated (par. 28, MCM). In deciding what offense to charge, the accuser necessarily will have concluded what the proper Article of War is. No matter how many offenses an accused commits, if they are all violations of a single Article of War, there will be only one charge. For example, AW 93 covers, among other things, the offenses of arson, burglary, perjury, forgery and assault with intent to do bodily harm. If an accused committed each one of those offenses, he would have violated only one Article of War. Accordingly, in charging him with those five offenses there would be one charge--violation of AW 93--and five specifications, each setting out a separate offense. On the other hand, if the accused committed the offense of

larceny and also deserted the service, he would have violated two Articles of War, i.e., AW 93 by larceny and AW 58 by deserting. In charging him, therefore, there would be two charges with one specification under each. Designation of the wrong Article of War in a charge is not fatal, provided that the specification sets out an offense (par. 28, MCM).
2. Specifications, in general. In drafting the specification, the accuser should see appendix 4, Manual for Courts-Martial, for the appropriate form. There he will find 167 forms for specifications covering almost every offense. The specification for willful disobedience in violation of AW 64, for example, is covered in Form 28. If there is a specification for the offense he wants to charge, as there will be in ninety-nine cases out of one hundred, he should copy that specification exactly. Any attempts to improve on the form or add new flourishes may result in failure to charge any offense. In the rare case where there is no form exactly covering the offense he wants to charge, the form for the offense which seems most like it should be followed as a guide. For example, there is no form for a specification charging involuntary manslaughter--i.e., the unintentional killing of a human being through culpable negligence. To allege that offense, the specification for voluntary manslaughter (Form 88) should be adapted by omitting the words "willfully, feloniously, and." In some cases there may be no form which even seems close to the offense to be charged. Then the accuser must make up his own. He should state clearly and concisely just what the accused did. In drawing up a new specification, care must be taken to show that the acts done by the accused were unlawful by stating that he did the acts "unlawfully" or "wrongfully," otherwise no offense may be stated. For example, an allegation that the accused "took and carried away" the property of another person does not set out an offense since he may have had permission to take it or have done so under orders from a superior. If, however,it is stated that he took it "wrongfully" or "unlawfully," it is clear that an offense was committed. Forms of specifications for wrongful taking and conversion of property of another are set out in appendix 7. Before drafting the specification, the Instructions, appendix 4, pp. 236-238, Manual for Courts-Martial, should be studied. They contain detailed information as to the method for completing the forms. Other particular matters to be observed in drafting specifications are discussed below.

3. Abbreviations. Abbreviations should not be used in specifications. Grades, organizations and months should be written out in full. However, the numerical designation of the organization should be set out in figures instead of words--e.g., "341st Field Artillery Battalion" or "IX Armored Corps"--except where the official designation of the organization is always written out as in the case of an Army, an Air Force, or a Service Command--e.g., "Third Army," "First Air Force," Fourth Service Command." (See par. 6, AR 220-5, 16 December 1944.)

4. Serial numbers. The serial number of the accused should not appear in specifications. (par. a, app. 4, MCM).

5. Description of persons. The accused should be described by name, rank and organization only. If a civilian, appropriate descriptive words showing jurisdiction should be added after his name, such as "a person accompanying the armies of the United States in the field" (par. c, app. 4, MCM). Other persons mentioned in the specification may be identified by name and rank only, if military personnel, and by name only, if civilians.

6. Dates. Dates should be alleged as "on or about" a certain date. The hour of the day at which the offense is alleged to have occurred should not usually be stated. In charging absence without leave for a brief period during one calendar day, however, the hours of departure and return may be stated, if known.

7. Details. Although a specification must describe the offense charged so that it reasonably refers to that specific offense and no other, it should not allege details unnecessary for that purpose. Since details alleged must be proved, elaborate specifications unduly increase difficulties of proof. It is not ordinarily proper to allege the street address where the offense occurred,or to recite the occupation, residence, or station of persons, or detailed descriptions of articles. For example, a specification alleging that the accused did "at Cheyenne, Wyoming, on or about 15 November 1943, feloniously take, steal and carry away a Chevrolet automobile, value about $375, the property of George R. Crowe" would be sufficient.

8. Value. In order to be the subject of a larceny, the thing stolen must be of some value. The articles alleged to have been stolen and the value of each should be stated. For example, an allegation that the accused stole "clothing and equipment of a total value of $_____" is improper; it should be stated as "one shirt, value $_____, one pair of shoes, value $_____, and one blanket, value $_____, of a total value of $_____." Value of articles should be stated as "value $2.08" (when known exactly, e.g., per Government price list), or "value about $5" (the usual form). If money itself is involved (e.g., when money is alleged to have been stolen), it should be described as "about $3.50, lawful money of the United States."

9. Several larcenies. When several articles appear to have been stolen at about the same time and place, from either one or several persons, as when a thief enters a barracks at night and steals articles from several foot lockers, the larceny of all of them should be alleged in a single specification (pars. 27, 149g, MCM). If, however, there were several unrelated larcenies committed at different times, each should be set out in a separate specification.

10. Examples of correct and incorrect drafting. The following example illustrates the errors most commonly made in the drafting of specifications:

    Specification: In that Pvt. Arthur N. Beadle, 38432987, Co. C, 118th Inf., Ft. Sam Houston, Tex., did, at Ft. Sam Houston, Tex., on or about March 20th, 1943, take, steal, and carry away one billfold, black leather, value two dollars ($2,00), containing three dollars and fifty cents ($3.50) in currency, and personal papers, all the property of Pvt. Lester P. Wake, Co. B, 118th Inf., Ft. Sam Houston, Tex.

    Under the rules set out above, the foregoing specification should read as follows:

    Specification: In that Private Arthur N. Beadle, Company C, 118th Infantry, did, at Fort Sam Houston, Texas, on or about 20 March 1943, feloniously take, steal and carry away one billfold, value about $2, and about $3.50, lawful money of the United States, of a total value of $5.50, the property of Private Lester P. Wake.

11. Numbering charges and specifications. When there is but a single charge--that is, when a violation of only one Article of War is alleged--the charge is not numbered. When there is more than one, however, the charges are to be number with Roman numerals--I.e., Charge I, Charge II, etc. Similarly, if there is but one specification under a particular charge, it should not be numbered. But if more than one specification is alleged under one CHarge,they are designated by Arabic numerals--i.e., Specification 1, Specification 2 (app. 4b, MCM). Additional charges (par. 23c, supra) are numbered in the same manner as the original charge; a single added charge is designated simply "Additional Charge," but if more than one, they are numbered Additional Charge I, Additional Charge II, etc. Specifications under additional charges are designated in the same way as ordinary specifications. The term "Additional" is not used in connection with the specifications.
26. PREPARATON OF CHARGE SHEET.

    1. General. Having drafted the charges and specifications, the accuser must then prepare the charge sheet in triplicate. The first page consists largely of personal data regarding the accused and a list of witnesses and of records or other articles to be used as evidence. The instructions on the charge sheet (WD AGO Form 115) should be carefully followed. Attention should be given to the matters noted below.

    2. Name, etc., of accused. The instructions on page 1 as to the name of the accused state "Give last name, first name, and middle initial in that order followed by serial number, grade, company, regiment, and or service, or by other appropriate description of accused." If will be noted that the method of stating the name is the reverse of that used in the specification. It will be noted also that the serial number must be stated, whereas it is never set out in the specification. Great care must

be taken to set out this data correctly since an error may cause the wrong person to be charged. If the accused is not a member of a military organization or of any arm or service, such as a civilian accompanying the Army, the "appropriate description" following his name would be words indicating what he was and that he was subject to military law.
3. Age of accused. It is preferable to state the age of the accused in years and months as of the date of preferring charges (e.g., 25 8/12). The word "present" should be inserted over the age.

4. Pay of accused. Pay of the accused will be base pay only. "Base pay" includes the increase for longevity and for foreign service. (See par. 124d, infra.) The amount of any compulsory deduction from an enlisted man's pay under the Servicemen's Dependents Allowance Act should be entered in the space "Allotments to Dependents" and indicated as "Class F." (See par. 39, AR 35-5540, 5 January 1944.) This space is also used for entering the amount of any voluntary allotment for the benefit of dependents. Deductions for National Service Life Insurance are to be entered in the space designated "Government Insurance Deduction." Other allotments should not be entered on the charge sheet.

5. Service of accused. Prior service should be shown under this heading with the inclusive dates of such service, organizations from which discharged, and the total length of such service in years, months, and days. If the accused had no prior service, the statement "no prior service" should be made. After such entry, current service should be shown. In the case of enlisted men, this should include a statement as to the place and date of enlistment or induction and of the term of enlistment, which now is "for the duration of the war and 6 months." In the case of officers, this should include a statement of the date of original commission and dates of entry upon present active service.

6. Data as to witnesses, etc. In this space should be listed the names and addresses of witnesses under the headings "Against the Accused" and "For the Accused." If there are no witnesses for the accused, the word "None" should be entered under the latter heading. If the witnesses are in military service, their grade, organization, and station should be shown--e.g., "Corporal Arthur T. Bickle, Battery B, 741st Coast Artillery Battalion, Fort Dawes, Maine." Under the heading "Documentary and Other Evidence" there should be listed any papers, documents, or other articles or things--e.g., a knife,currency, etc.--which may be introduced in evidence. If there is no such evidence, the word "None" should be entered under that heading.The record of previous conviction (par. 29, infra) should not be referred to on the charge sheet.

7. Data as to restraint of the accused. The type, place and date of any restraint imposed should be stated. If the accused was initially placed in arrest or confinement elsewhere by military or civil authorities, the date and place of such initial restraint should also be shown. If no restraint was imposed, this fact should be indicated.

27. PREPARING JOINT CHARGES. In preparing joint charges, page 1 of the charge sheet should be filled in as to one accused in the ordinary way. (See par. 26, supra.) The personal data as to the other accused should be filled in on page 1 of another charge sheet--the page cut off immediately above "Data as to witnesses, etc." It is usually unnecessary to fill out the entire first page as to the other accused since the data as to witnesses and restraint will nearly always be the same for all. Securely fasten the cut page to the top of page 1 of the first charge sheet. Forms for specifications for joint offenses may be found in Appendix 4f, page 237, MCM. In using these forms it must be noted that an allegation "that Private A and Private B, acting jointly and in pursuance of a common intent, did, in conjunction with Private C" do a certain act, does not state an offense against Private C, but does charge a joint offense against A and B.

28. SIGNING AND SWEARING TO CHARGES. After he has prepared the charge sheet, the accuser will sign the same on the original on page 3 and swear to if before a person authorized to administer oaths. Ordinarily the copies need not be signed. The charges may be sworn to before any of the officers authorized by AW 114 to administer oaths. The notes in fine print appearing at the end of the affidavit should be strictly followed. It must appear that the accuser either has personal knowledge of, or has investigated, each matter made the subject of charges. The inapplicable words should be stricken from the affidavit. If the accuser has personal knowledge of certain specifications and charges and has investigated others, nothing need be stricken. Care should be taken to insure that the affidavit on the charge sheet shows the date of its execution and the name, rank, branch and capacity (i.e., Adjutant, Summary COurt, etc.) of the officer administer the oath. Unless it appears that the officer was one who could administer oaths, it may be contended that the charges were not sworn to. If the accuser believes the accused is innocent, but feels that he should be tried for his own protection--that is, in order to have judicial determination of his innocence--he need not swear to the charges. Such a case would be one in which, for example, a sentinel in the performance of his duty killed an intruder and it was desired to try him for homicide so that the lawfulness of the killing might be established. An accused, however, may not be tried upon unsworn charges if he objects (par. 31, MCM).

29. EVIDENCE OF PREVIOUS CONVICTIONS.

    1. General. When forwarded, the charges should be accompanied by evidence of previous convictions (par. 80a, MCM). The evidence is usually in the for of an

extract copy of the pertinent entries in the accused's service record (app. 2, par. 216 infra) showing the date and nature of the offense, the sentence imposed, and the fact of approval. The extract must be authenticated by the official custodian of the service record, who ordinarily is the unit personnel officer.
2. Convictions which should be included. The evidence of previous convictions should be in such form that it can be introduced at trial. Therefore, only convictions which can be considered by the court should be included. Disciplinary punishment under the 104th Article of War is not a conviction, and no reference thereto should be made. The convictions must be convictions by courts-martial. Such previous convictions may be considered by the court only if they meet two conditions: (1) they must be for offenses which were committed during the accused current enlistment (if an enlisted man) or current appointment (if an officer; and (2) they must be for offenses which were committed within 1 year of the offense being charged (if an enlisted man) or within 3 years of the offense being charged (if an officer). Thus, if a soldier is tried on 7 July 1944 for an offense committed on 1 July 1944, only convictions for offenses committed within 1 year before 1 July 1944 would be admissible--i.e., offenses committed on or after 1 July 1943. Therefore, a conviction for an offense committed on 29 June 1943 would not be admissible and should not be included in the certificate of previous convictions. In computing 1 year, periods of absence without leave for which the accused was convicted should be excluded (par. 79c, MCM). Thus, in the example given above, if the accused has been convicted of absence without leave from 1 September 1943 to 1 October 1943, that period of 30 days would not be counted in computing back 1 year from 1 July 1944. One year from 1 July 1944 (excluding that 30-day period) would be 1 June 1943. Therefore, any offense committed on or after 1 June 1943 would be admissible, and the conviction for the offense committed on 29 June 1943 should be included in the certificate in such case. Periods of absence without leave are excluded only if the accused was convicted of such absence. Disciplinary punishment under AW 104 for such absence is not a conviction. THus, if, in the example last given, the accused had in fact been absent without leave from 1 September 1943 to 1 October 1943 but had not been convicted of such absence, the 30-day period would not be excluded. Nor are periods during which the accused was not in a duty status during the one year for other reasons (as, for example, periods in confinement or in a hospital for treatment for venereal disease) to be excluded. The only periods which may be discounted are periods of unauthorized absences for which the accused was convicted.

3. Where no admissible previous convictions. If the accused has no admissible previous convictions, a certificate that there are no admissible convictions should be forwarded. Although, if no evidence of convictions is forwarded with the record, it may properly be assumed that

there are none which can be considered, it is better to have an express certificate of that fact. Then there can be no question of merely forgetting to forward evidence of convictions if there are any.
30. STATEMENT OF EVIDENCE UPON WHICH CHARGES BASED. Unless the accuser believes that the charges will be disposed of under AW 104 or by reference to a summary court, he should prepare a summary of the evidence upon which the charges are based.This summary is intended to give the commanding officer sufficient information about the case so that he can decide how to dispose of it, and to guide the investigating officer if the charges are later formally investigated. The summary may be in any convenient form. (See app. 2, pp. 180-185 infra.) The signatures of witnesses to the summaries of their respective testimony should be obtained when practicable and when no undue delay will result (par. 32, MCM). If, for any reason, it is desirable to make a more complete statement of the testimony of any witness (for example, if it may be difficult for the investigating officer to interview him later, or if the accused will probably not desire to cross-examine him, or if there is a possibility that he may be tampered with before the investigation), the substance of his testimony,stated in the first person, should be signed and sworn to by him. Each such sworn statement should be entered on a separate sheet of plain paper for possible attachment to the investigating officer's report.

31. LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL. Charges not disposed of under the provisions of AW 104 should be forwarded by letter of transmittal unless the accuser believes that they should be referred to a summary court-martial. The letter may be very brief, and a mimeographed form may be used. (See app. 2, p. 175 infra.) It should contain a specific recommendation as to disposition of the charges. An explanation of any unusual features of the case or a statement as to the character of service of the accused may be included. Any documentary evidence that may be used in proof of the offense should be listed in the body of the letter and should normally be forwarded with the charges. (Par. 32, MCM.) Any articles which may be introduced in evidence should be referred to with a statement as to where they may be found. Other papers submitted with the charges (such as prior correspondence) should be listed separately as inclosures. If it is believed that trial should be had by summary court-martial, charges may be submitted without a letter of transmittal or any accompanying papers other than the certificate of previous convictions. Such forwarding will be considered a recommendation for trial by summary court.

32. SUBMISSION OF CHARGES TO IMMEDIATE COMMANDER OF ACCUSED. If a person other than the immediate commander of the accused prefers charges, he ordinarily should submit them to such commander for action.

(Par. 30, MCM.) Thath officer is the only primarily concerned with the discipline of the accused and is in the best position to know of any personal elements that should be considered in determining what disposition to make of the charges. The accuser, moreover, may not have available the personal data regarding the accused which must be shown in the charge sheet, and the immediate commanding officer can supply the necessary information. Upon receipt of the charges, the immediate commander will take action in accordance with paragraph 33, MCM. If any of the offenses alleged may properly be punished by action under AW 104, he should so dispose of them, and line out and initial the specifications and charges thus disposed of. Charges not so disposed of should be carefully examined to insure that they are complete and correct in form and properly signed and sworn to by a person subject to military law, and that the accuser's summary of evidence is sufficient. Any missing personal data on the first page of the charge sheet should be inserted and any errors corrected. No corrections or changes may be made in the charges or specifications themselves.
33. FORWARDING CHARGES. Charges which the immediate commanding officer of the accused has preferred himself, and charges submitted to him by others which he has not disposed of under AW 104, will be forwarded by him directly to the officer who has authority to appoint summary court-martial for the command (par. 30a, MCM), e.g., the regimental or post commander. (See par. 52, infra, for a discussion of the commanders having such authority.) The charges will be forwarded by letter of transmittal (except where trial by summary court-martial is recommended), inclosing the summary of evidence, certificate of previous convictions, and any other pertinent memoranda discussed in the preceding paragraphs.

Table of Contents
Previous Chapter (4) *  Next Chapter (6)