Skip to content

Ucmj Charges & Ucmj Attorneys

Menu
Menu

UCMJ Article 87 Missing Movement vs Article 86 AWOL: Failing to Deploy vs Failing to Be Present

Posted on December 22, 2025 by ucmj

Legal Disclaimer: This article provides general legal information about the Uniform Code of Military Justice. It is not legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Every case involves unique facts and circumstances. If you are facing charges under the UCMJ, consult with a qualified military defense attorney immediately.

Both missing movement and AWOL involve a service member not being where they’re supposed to be. The critical difference is what they miss. Article 87 Missing Movement specifically addresses failing to deploy with a ship, aircraft, or unit. Article 86 Absence Without Leave covers being absent from any duty, formation, or appointed place. Missing movement is a specialized offense with serious implications for military readiness; AWOL is the general offense covering unauthorized absences.

The Movement Distinction

Article 87 Missing Movement requires:

Missing the departure of a ship, aircraft, or unit

With which the service member was required to move

Through design (intentional) or neglect

The focus is on failing to deploy when your unit moves out.

Article 86 AWOL covers:

Absence from unit, organization, or appointed place

Without authority

For any period of time

The focus is on being absent from where you’re supposed to be, regardless of whether a deployment is involved.

Why Missing Movement Is Separate

Missing movement deserves its own article because:

Operational impact. When units deploy, missing personnel create immediate capability gaps.

Irreversibility. Once a ship sails or aircraft departs, the missed movement can’t be easily corrected.

Mission compromise. Deployments often involve time-sensitive missions where absent personnel directly affect success.

Planning disruption. Units plan based on expected personnel; absences disrupt those plans.

Combat implications. Missing wartime movements can endanger others and compromise operations.

These concerns justify treating missing movement as categorically more serious than ordinary AWOL.

Article 87: Missing Movement Elements

Missing movement requires:

A movement of a ship, aircraft, or unit. The unit must actually be moving or deploying.

The accused was required to move with it. Orders or duty required the service member to deploy.

The accused missed the movement. They weren’t present when the movement occurred.

Through design or neglect.

Design: Intentional missing (knew about it and chose not to go)

Neglect: Missing through carelessness or failure to take proper precautions

The “design or neglect” element determines punishment severity.

Article 86: AWOL Elements

AWOL requires:

Absence from unit, organization, or place of duty. Not being where required.

The absence was without authority. No permission was given.

The accused knew of the requirement. Awareness of where they should be.

Various AWOL specifications exist:

Failure to go to appointed place of duty

Going from appointed place of duty

Absence from unit or organization

The offense scales with duration and circumstances.

Relationship Between the Offenses

Missing movement and AWOL are related but distinct:

Missing movement often involves AWOL. If you miss your ship’s departure because you didn’t return from leave on time, you’re both AWOL and missing movement.

AWOL doesn’t always involve missing movement. Being late to formation is AWOL but isn’t missing movement if no deployment is involved.

Missing movement can occur without prior AWOL. You might be present on base but miss the ship’s departure because you were in the wrong location.

Prosecutors can charge both offenses for the same incident if both elements are satisfied.

Typical Fact Patterns

Clear missing movement:

A service member’s ship is scheduled to deploy. They fail to return from leave in time and the ship sails without them. Missing movement through neglect (failed to ensure timely return).

A service member receives orders to deploy with their unit. They intentionally avoid the departure, hiding until the unit leaves. Missing movement through design (intentional avoidance).

An aircraft is departing for a mission. A crew member oversleeps and misses the departure. Missing movement through neglect.

Clear AWOL (not missing movement):

A service member doesn’t show up for Monday morning formation. They’re absent but no deployment was missed. AWOL, not missing movement.

A service member overstays leave by three days but returns before any unit movement. AWOL for the unauthorized absence, but no missing movement.

A service member leaves their duty station without permission for several hours. AWOL, but no movement was involved.

Both offenses:

A service member goes AWOL three days before a scheduled deployment. They’re still absent when the unit deploys. Both AWOL (unauthorized absence) and missing movement (failed to deploy with unit).

Punishment Comparison

Article 87 (Missing Movement):

Through design: dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, confinement for 2 years

Through neglect: bad-conduct discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, confinement for 1 year

Article 86 (AWOL):

Failure to go/going from appointed place: confinement for 1 month, forfeiture of two-thirds pay for 1 month

Absence from unit (1-3 days): confinement for 1 month, forfeiture of two-thirds pay for 1 month

Absence from unit (3-30 days): confinement for 6 months, forfeiture of two-thirds pay for 6 months

Absence from unit (over 30 days): dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, confinement for 1 year

Absence with intent to avoid hazardous duty or shirk important service: dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, confinement for 5 years

Missing movement carries heavier punishment than ordinary AWOL, reflecting its greater operational impact.

Design vs Neglect

For missing movement, the mental state significantly affects punishment:

Design (intentional): The service member knew about the movement and deliberately missed it. Maximum 2 years confinement.

Neglect (careless): The service member didn’t intend to miss the movement but failed to take reasonable precautions. Maximum 1 year confinement.

This distinction acknowledges that deliberately avoiding deployment is worse than carelessly failing to make it.

Intent to Avoid Hazardous Duty

A special AWOL provision exists for absence intended to avoid hazardous duty or shirk important service:

Carries 5 years maximum confinement

Requires proof of specific intent to avoid the duty

Often charged when AWOL coincides with dangerous deployments

This provision bridges AWOL and missing movement by imposing severe punishment for absences designed to avoid combat or dangerous assignments.

Defenses

For missing movement:

The accused was present and didn’t miss the movement

The accused wasn’t required to move with the ship/aircraft/unit

Physical impossibility (couldn’t make it despite reasonable efforts)

Orders were unclear or the accused reasonably didn’t know about the movement

Emergency circumstances beyond control

For AWOL:

The absence was authorized

The accused didn’t know they were required to be present

Impossibility of return (stranded, medical emergency)

Mistaken orders or confusion about reporting requirements

The “Movement” Definition

What constitutes a “movement” for Article 87 purposes:

Ship movements. Vessels departing port, whether for training, deployment, or transfer.

Aircraft movements. Flights departing, whether routine or operational.

Unit movements. Ground units deploying, relocating, or moving to training exercises.

Routine daily travel generally isn’t a “movement.” The movement typically must be a scheduled departure of significance, not ordinary daily operations.

Practical Implications

For service members:

Know your unit’s schedule and upcoming movements

Return from leave with time to spare before deployments

Confirm your required presence for any movement

If problems arise, communicate immediately with your chain of command

For commands:

Ensure clear communication about movement schedules

Verify personnel accountability before movements

Document notifications given to service members

Address potential missing movement situations proactively

Recovery and Return

What happens after missing movement:

Reporting requirements. Service members should report to military authority as soon as possible.

Investigation. Commands investigate why the movement was missed.

Charging decisions. Prosecutors determine whether to charge missing movement, AWOL, or both.

Operational consequences. The member may be assigned to catch-up transportation or different duties.

Prompt return and cooperation generally result in better outcomes than extended absence.


Frequently Asked Questions

If I missed my flight because of a commercial airline delay, can I be charged with missing movement?

This raises the “neglect” question. If you booked travel with inadequate buffer time and a foreseeable delay caused you to miss the movement, that might be neglect. If you allowed reasonable time and an unforeseeable circumstance (weather emergency, major cancellation) prevented your arrival, you may have a defense based on impossibility. The key is whether you took reasonable precautions. Document everything: booking confirmations showing reasonable timing, evidence of the delay, your attempts to find alternatives, and your communications with your command about the situation. Commands generally distinguish between service members who planned poorly and those who faced genuine emergencies despite reasonable planning.

What’s the difference between missing movement and desertion?

Missing movement (Article 87) is failing to deploy with a ship, aircraft, or unit. Desertion (Article 85) is absence with intent to remain away permanently or to avoid hazardous duty. They address different concerns: missing movement focuses on the operational impact of not deploying; desertion focuses on abandoning military service entirely. Someone might miss movement without deserting (they intended to return but not to deploy). Someone might desert without missing a specific movement (they leave with intent to stay away permanently during a period with no scheduled deployments). The offenses can overlap when someone deliberately misses a deployment and intends to remain away permanently, but they’re conceptually distinct.

If my unit deployed while I was in the hospital, can I be charged with missing movement?

Generally no. Missing movement requires that you miss the movement through design or neglect. Being hospitalized isn’t design (intentional) or neglect (careless). It’s an inability to move due to circumstances beyond your control. However, the circumstances matter: if you were hospitalized for something self-inflicted to avoid deployment, that might be charged as missing movement through design. If you were hospitalized for a condition you should have reported earlier, questions might arise. But legitimate medical emergencies that prevent deployment aren’t missing movement. The military doesn’t expect you to deploy when medically unable. Ensure your command knows your status and have documentation of your hospitalization.

Related posts:

  1. UCMJ Article 96 Releasing Prisoner vs Article 97 Unlawful Detention: Opposite Sides of Custody Authority
  2. UCMJ Article 108 Military Property vs Article 109 Non-Military Property: Government Equipment vs Private and Foreign Property
  3. UCMJ Article 134 Reckless Endangerment vs Article 128 Aggravated Assault: Creating Danger vs Intentional Violence
  4. UCMJ Article 102 Forcing a Safeguard vs Article 103b Aiding the Enemy: Violating Protection Orders vs Helping Hostile Forces
  5. UCMJ Article 108 Military Property Offenses vs Article 109 Property Destruction: Government Equipment vs Any Property
  6. UCMJ Article 121 Larceny vs Article 134 Wrongful Appropriation: Permanent Taking vs Temporary Taking
  7. UCMJ Article 106 Spies vs Article 103a Espionage: Enemy Agents vs Information Betrayal
  8. UCMJ Article 127 Extortion vs Article 121 Larceny: Taking Through Threats vs Taking Through Stealth
  9. UCMJ Article 107 False Official Statements vs Article 131 Perjury: Lying to the Military vs Lying Under Oath
  10. UCMJ Article 113 Misbehavior of Sentinel vs Article 134 Sentinel Offenses: Wartime Failures vs General Guard Misconduct
  11. UCMJ Article 93a Prohibited Activities with Military Recruit or Trainee vs Article 120 Sexual Assault: Position-Based Prohibition vs General Sexual Offenses
  12. UCMJ Article 105 Misconduct as Prisoner vs Article 99 Misbehavior Before Enemy: Captivity vs Combat
  • What Is a UCMJ Attorney and Why You Need One
©2026 Ucmj Charges & Ucmj Attorneys | Built using WordPress and Responsive Blogily theme by Superb