A charge under Article 87b, UCMJ, is serious. Depending on the situation, it may involve allegations of escape from correctional custody, breach of correctional custody, or breach of restriction. These cases can put a service member's career, pay, and freedom at risk. This article breaks down what Article 87b, UCMJ, covers, what the government has to prove, and why the details matter so much.
If you are under investigation or have already been charged with resisting or breaking arrest, it’s critical to speak with experienced military defense counsel as early as possible. Contact MJA today for a free consultation.
Article 87b, UCMJ, codified at 10 U.S.C. § 887b, covers offenses involving correctional custody and restriction. In general, it applies when a person subject to the UCMJ is accused of:
escaping from correctional custody,
breaching correctional custody, or
breaching restriction.
These offenses are related, but they are not the same. The kind of restraint involved matters, and so does the way the government claims the accused violated it.
The answer depends on which type of misconduct is being alleged.
To prove escape from correctional custody, the government generally has to show that the accused was placed in correctional custody by someone authorized to do so, that the accused was under physical restraint while in correctional custody, and that the accused freed himself or herself from that physical restraint before being released by proper authority.
In plain terms, this offense focuses on getting free from physical restraint while serving correctional custody.
To prove breach of correctional custody, the government generally has to show that the accused was placed in correctional custody by someone authorized to do so, that some restraint short of physical restraint was imposed, and that the accused went beyond the limits of that restraint before being released from correctional custody or relieved of the restraint by proper authority.
This is different from escape from correctional custody because it does not require physical restraint. Instead, it involves violating the terms or limits imposed during correctional custody.
To prove breach of restriction, the government generally has to show that the accused was ordered to remain within certain limits by someone authorized to impose that restriction, that the accused knew what those limits were, and that the accused went beyond them before being properly released.
That knowledge requirement matters. The government must prove not only that restriction existed, but that the accused knew about the restriction and its limits.
Under the explanation accompanying Article 87b, UCMJ, escape from correctional custody involves a person who is undergoing the punishment of correctional custody under Article 15 and, before being set at liberty by proper authority, casts off physical restraint imposed by the custodian or by the place or conditions of custody.
Breach of correctional custody is similar, but it applies when the person is not under physical restraint and instead violates some other restraint imposed during that period.
Authority matters in these cases. Article 87b, UCMJ, requires that correctional custody or restriction be imposed by a person who is authorized to do so.
The source material explains that whether a category of person has authority to impose correctional custody is a legal question, while whether the particular person in the case actually had that status may be a factual issue.
Under the explanation of Article 87b, UCMJ, restriction is a form of moral restraint imposed by an order directing a person to remain within certain limits.
That can include:
restriction under the Rules for Courts-Martial,
restriction imposed as nonjudicial punishment,
restriction imposed as part of a court-martial sentence, or
administrative restriction related to training, operations, security, or safety.
So a breach of restriction case is not limited to just one setting. It can arise in several different military contexts.
The maximum punishment depends on the type of alleged conduct:
Escape from correctional custody: dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for up to 1 year
Breach of correctional custody: bad-conduct discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for up to 6 months
Breach of restriction: confinement for up to 1 month and forfeiture of two-thirds pay per month for 1 month
In general, escape from correctional custody carries serious punishment exposure under Article 87b, UCMJ.
Charges under Article 87b, UCMJ, can sound simple at first, but they often raise important questions. Those questions may include whether the person imposing correctional custody or restriction had authority, whether the accused was actually under physical restraint, whether the limits of the restraint were clear, and whether the accused knew the limits that applied.
Because these cases can create both criminal and administrative consequences, early legal review matters. In addition to the risk of court-martial punishment, a service member may face long-term professional and personal consequences affecting future service and civilian opportunities.
If you are being investigated or charged under Article 87b, UCMJ, understanding those distinctions early can matter. Military Justice Attorneys helps service members evaluate these allegations, understand their options, and respond strategically at the earliest stages of an investigation or case. Contact us today for a free consultation.
Our decentralized approach to military defense ensures that we can represent service members from any branch of the military, of any rank, at any military base or installation stateside or abroad.
Available 24/7 to Help Anyone in the World
(843) 755-6535