UCMJ Article 104: Public Records Offenses

Military administration runs on records. Pay accounts, evaluation reports, personnel files, investigation findings, and medical histories all depend on documents that are accurate and intact. A service member who tampers with those records, by altering, hiding, or destroying them, can be prosecuted under Article 104 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The offense protects the integrity of official records themselves, separate from any underlying misconduct the records might reveal.

Article 104 in its current form is a product of the Military Justice Act of 2016, which took effect on January 1, 2019. Before that revision, public-records tampering was charged as an enumerated offense under the general article, Article 134. The conduct now has its own statute at 10 U.S.C. 904. Earlier versions of “Article 104” addressed aiding the enemy, so older references to that number should be read against the current text.

What the offense is

The statute reaches any person subject to the UCMJ who willfully and unlawfully does either of two things: alters, conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys a public record; or takes a public record with the intent to alter, conceal, remove, mutilate, obliterate, or destroy it. A public record is an official document, file, report, or data compilation maintained by a government office or agency in the course of its duties. The statute applies equally to paper and electronic records.

Elements the government must prove

To convict, the prosecution must establish beyond a reasonable doubt:

  1. That a certain record was a public record.
  2. That the accused altered, concealed, removed, mutilated, obliterated, or destroyed it, or took it with intent to do one of those things.
  3. That the accused acted willfully and unlawfully.

The word “willfully” matters. The accused must have acted intentionally, not by accident or simple negligence. Spilling coffee on a document, or losing a file through carelessness, does not satisfy the statute. The word “unlawfully” means the act was without legal authority or justification.

What the government must show in practice

Prosecutors generally must prove that the document in question qualifies as a public record, meaning it was kept by an office or agency as part of its official function. They must then connect the accused to a specific prohibited act and show that the act was both intentional and without authority. Because the offense is complete once the wrongful act occurs, the government does not have to prove that the tampering caused measurable harm; the integrity of the record is itself the protected interest.

Maximum punishment

Under the Manual for Courts-Martial, the maximum punishment for a violation of Article 104 is a dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for three years. For offenses committed on or after December 27, 2023, the sentence is adjudged under the revised sentencing-parameter framework, but the authorized confinement ceiling for this offense remains three years.

Defenses

Common defenses to an Article 104 charge include:

  • Lawful authority. A member acting within authorized duties, such as a records custodian properly purging or amending a file under regulation, does not act unlawfully.
  • Not a public record. If the document was personal or otherwise outside the definition of a public record, the offense does not apply.
  • Lack of intent. Because the statute requires willful conduct, accidental damage or negligent loss is not punishable under this article.
  • Mistake of fact. A reasonable, honest belief that the accused had authority to act on the record can negate the unlawful and willful elements.

Distinctions from related offenses

Article 104 targets the integrity of records as such. It differs from obstruction of justice under Article 131b, which punishes acts intended to impede investigations or proceedings; tampering with a record may support either charge depending on intent and timing, and the same conduct can sometimes implicate both. It also differs from larceny under Article 121: if a record has independent value and is stolen, larceny may apply, while Article 104 addresses the alteration, concealment, or destruction of the record. False official statements under Article 107 punish lying in official matters, a different harm from physically tampering with a record.

Frequently asked questions

What counts as a public record under Article 104?
A public record is an official document, file, report, or data compilation kept by a government office or agency as part of its function. Service records, pay documents, investigation reports, and official databases are typical examples.

Do digital records count?
Yes. The statute applies to records in any form. Deleting, corrupting, or altering official electronic files is treated the same as tampering with paper documents.

Does the government have to prove harm resulted?
No. The offense is complete once the willful, unlawful act occurs. Whether the tampering caused measurable damage is not an element, although it may bear on sentencing.

What is the maximum punishment?
A dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for three years.

Is accidental destruction of a record a crime under this article?
No. The statute requires the accused to act willfully and unlawfully. Accidental damage or negligent loss does not meet that standard, though other provisions might apply depending on the facts.

Sources

  • 10 U.S.C. 904, Article 104, Public records offenses: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/904
  • Manual for Courts-Martial, United States (2024 edition), Part IV: https://jsc.defense.gov/Portals/99/2024%20MCM%20files/MCM%20(2024%20ed)%20(20240102)%20(adjusted%20bookmarks).pdf
  • United States v. Crafter, 64 M.J. 209 (C.A.A.F. 2006): https://www.armfor.uscourts.gov/
  • Military Attorney Joseph L. Jordan, Articles of the UCMJ

This article is for general informational purposes only and is not legal advice. It describes military law and procedure of public record, does not address any individual case, and does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Related:

  1. UCMJ Article 122: Robbery Robbery is theft committed face to face, with force or fear as the tool that overcomes the victim's will. That combination of taking and intimidation is why military law treats......
  2. UCMJ Article 105: Forgery Military operations run on paper and its electronic equivalents: leave forms, pay vouchers, contracts, orders, identification cards. When someone falsifies a signature or alters a document so it appears to......
  3. UCMJ Article 96: Releasing a Prisoner Without Authority Custody is a chain of trust. Once a person is lawfully held as a prisoner, the order to release belongs to lawful authority, and the responsibility to maintain custody belongs......
  4. UCMJ Article 120c: Other Sexual Misconduct Not every sexual offense in the military involves a physical sexual act. Some involve a hidden camera in a barracks shower, an image shared without permission, or deliberate exposure meant......
  5. UCMJ Article 107: False Swearing A sworn statement carries weight because the person giving it has formally promised that it is true. When a service member takes a lawful oath and then makes a statement......
  6. UCMJ Article 89: Disrespect Toward or Assault of a Superior Commissioned Officer The relationship between a service member and a superior commissioned officer rests on a baseline of respect and physical safety. Article 89 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice protects......
  7. UCMJ Article 131e: Prevention of Authorized Seizure of Property When investigators move to seize property, the law expects it to remain available for that seizure. A service member who destroys, removes, or disposes of property to keep it out......
  8. UCMJ Article 129: Burglary For most of its history, burglary in military law carried the old common-law trappings: it had to involve a dwelling house, and it had to happen at night. That is......
  9. UCMJ Article 78: Accessory After the Fact Justice can be obstructed after a crime as well as during it. Article 78 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice addresses the conduct that comes afterward: knowingly helping an......
  10. UCMJ Article 98: Misconduct as a Prisoner Capture by an enemy force is not a crime, and the Uniform Code of Military Justice does not punish a service member for being taken prisoner. What the Code does......
  11. UCMJ Article 87a: Resistance, Flight, Breach of Arrest, and Escape When a service member is taken into custody, ordered into arrest, or placed in confinement, military law expects that restraint to hold until a proper authority lifts it. Article 87a......
  12. UCMJ Article 80: Attempts A crime that fails or is interrupted can still reflect a deliberate decision to break the law. Article 80 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice addresses that reality by......
  13. UCMJ Article 131: Perjury The military justice system runs on sworn testimony, and a witness who lies under oath strikes at the reliability of every proceeding that follows. Article 131 of the Uniform Code......
  14. UCMJ Article 134: Disloyal Statements The armed forces depend on the loyalty of their members, and military law has long recognized that certain speech can damage that loyalty in ways that civilian law would not......
  15. UCMJ Article 81: Conspiracy Crimes planned by groups can be more dangerous than crimes committed alone, because coordination multiplies the harm a single person could cause. Article 81 of the Uniform Code of Military......