Court martial for drug use
The new law on Knowledge
a) There is no express mention of a mens rea requirement in the text of
Article 112a for the use, possession, or distribution of controlled
substances; the article merely prohibits the “wrongful” use, possession, or
distribution of various controlled substances. See UCMJ art. 112a.
Likewise the MCM does not identify a mens rea in its description of the
elements of these offenses. See MCM, pt. IV, section 37b(2). However, the
Court of Military Appeals (COMA) has long held that the absence of
knowledge as to the presence of the substance in question or its
contraband nature may give rise to a mistake or ignorance of fact defense
to charges of use or possession of controlled substance. E.g., United
States v. Greenwood, 19 C.M.R. 335 (C.M.A. 1955). Later, COMA
explicitly held that court-martial panels must be instructed that an accused
must knowingly possess or use a controlled substance to be criminally
liable for such an act. United States v. Mance, 26 M.J. 244 (C.M.A.
1988).
Source: The Crimes and Defenses Handbook, JA 337, 2009.
-----------------
Michael Waddington is a court martial lawyer - court martial attorney that defends military personnel worldwide as well as deployed civilian contractors subject to the UCMJ. He defends Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine, Coast Guard, and civilian contractor court martial cases. He has successfully defended military personnel as a court martial lawyer Army Navy Marine & Air Force court martials in Germany, England, San Diego, Norfolk, Jacksonville, Fort Bragg, Fort Jackson, Fort Stewart, Fort Gordon, Italy, Iraq, Kuwait, Korea, Okinawa, Japan, Yokota, and throughout the United States.
Comments