How does the appeals process work after a court-martial conviction?
Executive summary
Service members can appeal court-martial outcomes through a layered military process: summary court-martial convictions may be appealed to the next higher commander within five days, while special and general court-martial convictions move through automatic or mandatory reviews and then to service Courts of Criminal Appeals and potentially to the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF) or the U.S. Supreme Court [1] [2] [3]. Appeals focus on legal and procedural errors rather than re‑trying facts, and timelines and routes depend on the type of court-martial and the sentence imposed [4] [5].
1. Immediate first step: command review and summary‑court appeals
A summary court‑martial conviction does not automatically trigger judicial review; the convicted service member must file an appeal to the next higher commander within five days of sentence notification, and that commander can affirm, reduce, or set aside the punishment [1] [2]. Available sources do not mention other special deadline exceptions for summary‑court appeals beyond the five‑day window [1] [2] [6].
2. Special and general courts‑martial: automatic review and the convening authority
Most convictions at special or general courts‑martial receive administrative review before reaching an appellate court. The convening authority (the officer who referred the case to trial) performs an initial review and may only reduce or eliminate punishments—not increase them—as part of clemency considerations [1]. Where sentences meet statutory thresholds (for example confinement of a year or more, or punitive discharges), service Courts of Criminal Appeals have mandatory jurisdiction to review the record [3].
3. The role and limits of service Courts of Criminal Appeals
Each military department has a Court of Criminal Appeals staffed by military judges that reviews trial records for legal and factual sufficiency and for prejudicial error; these courts do not rehear witnesses but can grant relief such as overturning findings, ordering new sentencing, or ordering rehearings [3] [7]. The appeals courts review the trial primarily for procedural or legal mistakes rather than to substitute their factfinding for the original tribunal [4] [7].
4. Further review: CAAF and the civilian federal path
If the service Court of Criminal Appeals denies relief, an appellant can petition the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF), which is a civilian Article I court with discretionary review and serves as the usual next step before the U.S. Supreme Court [8] [7]. The Supreme Court exercises extremely limited certiorari jurisdiction over military cases and accepts only a tiny fraction of petitions [1] [6] [7].
5. Timing and procedural traps: why deadlines matter
Time limits vary by forum and severity. For example, some guides cite a 60‑day window for initiating aspects of the appellate process after sentencing in many cases, and other deadlines (such as the five‑day summary appeal) are much stricter; missing deadlines or procedural steps can foreclose remedies [5] [2]. The appeals process is described across sources as highly technical and unforgiving, making experienced appellate counsel essential [9] [8].
6. What relief looks like — and what it does not
Appellate courts can reverse convictions, order new trials, grant sentence rehearings, or remand for further factfinding, but they do not typically conduct new fact‑finding or accept new evidence on appeal; the focus is on legal error and whether the original proceedings were fair and lawful [4] [7]. Clemency remains an available option at various stages and even after appellate exhaustion, but clemency is discretionary [1] [6].
7. Government appeals and evolving rules
Recent statutory changes have expanded some government appeal rights (for instance allowing government appeal of plainly unreasonable sentences under amended Article 56(d), UCMJ, as noted in practitioner summaries), which introduces a new, adversarial dynamic to certain sentencing outcomes [10] [11]. Sources note this is a developing area likely to generate litigation and strategic adjustments by defense counsel [10].
8. Practical takeaways and strategic considerations
Service members retain a right to military counsel throughout appellate stages and may hire civilian counsel; appellate success typically requires specialized military appellate experience because rules and thresholds differ by service and by the sentence imposed [1] [8]. For those seeking relief, the pragmatic path is clear: preserve issues at trial, track tight deadlines (especially the five‑day summary appeal), obtain experienced appellate counsel, and prepare for a multi‑layered process that may end at CAAF or the Supreme Court [5] [8].
Limitations: this account synthesizes practitioner guides and informational sites; available sources do not provide exhaustive statutory text or every service‑specific rule variation, so consult a qualified military appellate attorney and the controlling UCMJ articles and service rules for case‑specific guidance [1] [3].