UCMJ Article 134 Failure to Pay Debts vs Article 123a Check Offenses: Owing Money vs Writing Bad Checks
On this page: 7 sections
Owing money is an offense under Article 134 only when the failure to pay is dishonorable. Writing a bad check is an offense under Article 123a only when the writer knew, at the moment the check changed hands, that the funds would not be there, and acted with intent to defraud or deceive. Between the two sits a third offense: a check written in good faith that bounces later because the writer dishonorably failed to keep funds in the account.
The timing of the culpable state of mind is what sorts a case among the three.
Article 123a: knowledge at the moment of the check
Article 123a applies to any person subject to the UCMJ who makes, draws, utters, or delivers a check, draft, or order in one of two situations:
(1) for the procurement of any article or thing of value, with intent to defraud; or
(2) for the payment of any past due obligation, or for any other purpose, with intent to deceive;
and does so “knowing at the time that the maker or drawer has not or will not have sufficient funds in, or credit with, the bank or other depository for the payment of that check, draft, or order in full upon its presentment.”
Source: 10 U.S.C. § 923a (Article 123a).
Both clauses require knowledge and a specific intent. The first clause covers checks passed for the purpose of obtaining something of value, whether or not anything is actually obtained (MCM, Part IV, ¶ 70.c(5)); the second covers paying a past-due debt or any other purpose, such as paying an obligation that is not yet due (¶ 70.c(7)). The Manual defines intent to defraud as an intent to obtain something of value through a misrepresentation, and intent to deceive as an intent to mislead, cheat, or trick another by a misrepresentation to gain an advantage or cause a disadvantage (¶ 70.c(14)-(15)).
Several points from the Manual’s explanation shape the offense:
- The moment that counts. The required intent and knowledge must exist when the instrument is made, uttered, or delivered. If they can be shown for that moment, neither presentment nor refusal of payment has to be proved, as with a check drawn on a nonexistent bank (¶ 70.c(16)).
- The person passing the check. A person who knowingly passes someone else’s worthless check can commit the offense without having written it (¶ 70.c(4)).
- Postdated checks. The check need not be payable immediately. A postdated check given as a future installment payment can violate the article if the intent and knowledge are present (¶ 70.c(7)).
- Honest mistake is an affirmative defense (¶ 70.c(18), citing R.C.M. 916(j)).
The five-day rule
The statute contains its own rule of evidence. A check refused for insufficient funds is prima facie evidence of the intent to defraud or deceive and of knowledge of insufficient funds, “unless the maker or drawer pays the holder the amount due within five days after receiving notice, orally or in writing, that the check, draft, or order was not paid on presentment” (10 U.S.C. § 923a).
The Manual explains what that payment does and does not do. Payment within five days of notice, or a failure to give notice at all, “precludes the prosecution from using the statutory rule of evidence but does not preclude conviction of this offense if all the elements are otherwise proved” (¶ 70.c(17)). Paying promptly removes a shortcut in proof; it does not erase the offense if knowledge and intent at the time of writing can be shown another way.
Dishonorable failure to pay a debt
This Article 134 offense has four elements: a debt in a certain sum, a date on which it became due and payable, a dishonorable failure to pay while it remained due, and conduct that was prejudicial to good order and discipline or service discrediting (MCM, Part IV, ¶ 96.b).
The Manual sets the threshold above ordinary financial trouble (¶ 96.c):
- More than negligence. The failure must be marked by “deceit, evasion, false promises, or other distinctly culpable circumstances indicating a deliberate nonpayment or grossly indifferent attitude toward one’s just obligations.”
- No defense or offset. The accused must not have had a defense, offset, or counterclaim, in fact or in the accused’s belief, at the time alleged.
- Genuine disputes. The offense “should not be charged” if there was a genuine dispute about the facts or law affecting the obligation to pay.
- Satisfied creditors. The offense is not committed if the creditors are satisfied with the debtor’s conduct about payment.
A long period of nonpayment, or a denial of the debt, may tend to show dishonor, but the court-martial may convict only if it finds from all the evidence that the conduct was in fact dishonorable.
The check that bounces later
The third offense, also under Article 134, is making and uttering a check and then dishonorably failing to place or maintain enough funds to cover it (MCM, Part IV, ¶ 94). The Manual separates it from Article 123a on timing: “there need be no intent to defraud or deceive at the time of making, drawing, uttering, or delivery,” and the accused need not have known then that the funds would be short. “The gist of the offense lies in the conduct of the accused after uttering the instrument” (¶ 94.c).
Negligence in keeping a bank balance is not enough. The conduct must reflect bad faith or gross indifference, and the principles of the debt offense in ¶ 96 apply.
How the facts sort
| Article 123a | Article 134, worthless check | Article 134, debt | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Instrument | Check, draft, or order | Check | None required |
| When the culpable state must exist | When the check is made or passed | After the check is uttered | While the debt is due and payable |
| Mental state | Knowledge of insufficient funds plus intent to defraud or deceive | Dishonorable failure: bad faith or gross indifference | Dishonorable failure: deceit, evasion, false promises, or similar |
| Terminal element | None | Prejudicial or service discrediting | Prejudicial or service discrediting |
For example, a service member who writes a check for past-due rent knowing the account cannot cover it, intending the landlord to believe the rent is paid, fits the intent-to-deceive clause of Article 123a. If instead the check was good when written and the writer then empties the account knowing the check is still outstanding, that points to the Article 134 worthless-check offense, if the failure is shown to be dishonorable. A service member who stops paying a personal loan and repeatedly makes false promises to the lender, with no dispute about the amount owed, fits the pattern ¶ 96 describes, again only if the failure is shown to be dishonorable.
Maximum punishments
| Offense | Maximum (MCM, Part IV, ¶ 70.d, ¶ 94.d, ¶ 96.d) |
|---|---|
| Article 123a, to procure something of value with intent to defraud, face amount $1,000 or less | Bad-conduct discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, 6 months |
| Article 123a, to procure something of value with intent to defraud, face amount more than $1,000 | Dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, 5 years |
| Article 123a, to pay a past-due obligation or for any other purpose, with intent to deceive | Bad-conduct discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, 6 months |
| Article 134, worthless check by dishonorably failing to maintain funds | Bad-conduct discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, 6 months |
| Article 134, dishonorably failing to pay a debt | Bad-conduct discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, 6 months |
Only the fraud clause of Article 123a rises above six months, and only when the face amount exceeds $1,000. Where every finding of guilty is for an offense committed after December 27, 2023, the military judge determines the sentence in a general or special court-martial unless the case is capital (10 U.S.C. § 853(b)(1)).
Sources
- 10 U.S.C. § 923a, making, drawing, or uttering check, draft, or order without sufficient funds (Article 123a)
- 10 U.S.C. § 934, general article (Article 134)
- 10 U.S.C. § 853, findings and sentencing (Article 53)
- Manual for Courts-Martial, United States (2024 edition), Part IV, ¶ 70, ¶ 94, and ¶ 96; R.C.M. 916(j).
This summary of Articles 123a and 134 is legal information about how the offenses are defined; whether a particular debt or check meets them turns on the evidence in that case. This page reflects the UCMJ as amended through Public Law 119-60 (December 18, 2025) and the Manual for Courts-Martial (2024 edition) as amended by Executive Order 14130.