How Does the Military Appellate Court System Function?

Court-martial appeals run through three levels: a service Court of Criminal Appeals (CCA), the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF), and the Supreme Court by certiorari. Since the FY2023 National Defense Authorization Act, an accused may appeal to the CCA from any general or special court-martial judgment that includes a finding of guilty, and serious sentences are reviewed automatically. CAAF reviews death cases, cases certified by a Judge Advocate General, and cases where it grants a petition. Deadlines apply at each step, and Article 69 review by the Judge Advocate General now covers summary courts-martial and offers a fallback route for general and special courts-martial (Article 69(a)).

Level one: the Courts of Criminal Appeals

Each Judge Advocate General establishes a Court of Criminal Appeals, sitting in panels of at least three appellate military judges, who may be officers or civilians and must have at least 12 years of experience in the practice of law (Article 66(a)). The four courts are the Army, Navy-Marine Corps, Air Force, and Coast Guard Courts of Criminal Appeals. Post-trial steps that come before appeal, including entry of judgment, are covered in the post-trial review process.

How a case gets there. Article 66(b) gives the CCA jurisdiction in four ways:

Route	When it applies	Source
Appeal by the accused	"a timely appeal from the judgment of a court-martial … that includes a finding of guilty"	Art. 66(b)(1)(A)
Summary court-martial application	An application for review under Article 69(d) that the CCA grants	Art. 66(b)(1)(B)
Government sentence appeal	Cases the Judge Advocate General sends under Article 56(d)	Art. 66(b)(2)
Automatic review	The judgment includes death, dismissal of an officer, cadet, or midshipman, a dishonorable or bad-conduct discharge, or confinement for 2 years or more	Art. 66(b)(3)

The forum differences that decide which cases reach automatic review are compared in the three types of courts-martial.

The appeal deadline. An appeal under Article 66(b)(1)(A) is timely if filed before the later of the end of the 90-day period beginning when the accused receives notice of appellate rights, or a date the CCA sets by rule or order (Article 66(c)).

Which version applies. The FY2023 NDAA (Pub. L. 117-263, § 544) created the current “finding of guilty” appeal right. It does not apply to any matter submitted to a CCA before December 23, 2022 (Pub. L. 117-263, § 544(d)). Under the earlier text, an accused could appeal in a case where the sentence extended to confinement for more than six months and the case was not subject to automatic review, among other listed routes.

What a Court of Criminal Appeals can do

Law and, on request, fact. The CCA “may affirm only such findings of guilty as the Court finds correct in law, and in fact” under the factual sufficiency rule (Article 66(d)(1)(A)). The current factual sufficiency rule has three parts (Article 66(d)(1)(B)):

The court “may consider whether the finding is correct in fact upon request of the accused if the accused makes a specific showing of a deficiency in proof.”
It then weighs the evidence with “appropriate deference to the fact that the trial court saw and heard the witnesses and other evidence” and to the military judge’s findings of fact.
It may set aside or modify the finding only if it is “clearly convinced that the finding of guilty was against the weight of the evidence”.

Which offenses get which rule. The FY2021 NDAA (Pub. L. 116-283, § 542) made that change, and it applies only “to any case in which every finding of guilty … is for an offense that occurred on or after” January 1, 2021. If any finding of guilty is for an earlier offense, the earlier, broader factual sufficiency review applies to the case.

Sentence review. The CCA may consider whether the sentence violates the law; whether it is inappropriately severe (for offenses without a sentencing parameter, or above the top of the parameter range); whether a parameter was applied incorrectly; whether the sentence is plainly unreasonable; and, for death or life without parole determined by members, whether it is otherwise appropriate (Article 66(e)(1)). It may also grant relief for error or excessive delay in post-trial processing (Article 66(d)(2)).

Level two: the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces

CAAF “consists of five judges”, each “appointed from civilian life by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate,” for terms that expire on a fixed date tied to the fifteenth anniversary of appointment (Article 142, 10 U.S.C. § 942).

Three routes to CAAF (Article 67(a)):

all cases in which the sentence, as affirmed by a CCA, extends to death;
cases the Judge Advocate General orders sent to CAAF after review by a CCA;
cases in which CAAF grants the accused’s petition “on good cause shown”.

The petition deadline. The accused may petition “within 60 days from the earlier of” the date the accused is notified of the CCA decision, or the date a copy of the decision, after service on appellate counsel, is mailed by first-class certified mail to the accused’s address (Article 67(b)).

Law only. CAAF “shall take action only with respect to matters of law” (Article 67(c)(4)). In a petition case it need act only on the issues it specifies in granting review (Article 67(c)(3)).

Level three: the Supreme Court

“Decisions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces are subject to review by the Supreme Court by writ of certiorari” under 28 U.S.C. § 1259 (10 U.S.C. § 867a(a)). Section 1259 lists four categories: mandatory death cases, certified cases, cases in which CAAF “granted or refused to grant a petition for review”, and other cases in which CAAF “granted or refused to grant relief.” The accused may petition without prepaying fees (§ 867a(b)).

A recent change for denied petitions. Until the FY2024 NDAA (Pub. L. 118-31, § 533), § 867a(a) stated that the Supreme Court “may not review by a writ of certiorari under this section any action of the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces in refusing to grant a petition for review.” The amendment took effect on December 22, 2024, and applies to petitions submitted to CAAF “for the first time on or after such effective date”; CAAF actions on earlier petitions remain “final and conclusive.” A case that never reaches CAAF still has no certiorari route under § 1259.

In Ortiz v. United States (2018), the Supreme Court confirmed its jurisdiction to review CAAF decisions: “The judicial character and constitutional pedigree of the court-martial system enable this Court, in exercising appellate jurisdiction, to review the decisions of the court sitting at its apex.”

Article 69 review by the Judge Advocate General

Article 69 now does two jobs. For a summary court-martial, the Judge Advocate General may modify or set aside findings and sentence. For a general or special court-martial, the Judge Advocate General may order the case reviewed by the CCA under Article 66 (Article 69(a)). An application must be filed within one year (for general and special courts-martial, one year after the end of the 90-day appeal window), extendable for good cause but not beyond three years (Article 69(b)). An accused whose summary court-martial review is denied may apply to the CCA, which may grant review (Articles 66(b)(1)(B), 69(d)). For cases with a finding of guilty that can be appealed under Article 66(b)(1)(A), Article 69 is a fallback, not the primary road. Remedies outside direct appeal and Article 69 are described in extraordinary writs and remedies.

Counsel on appeal

The Judge Advocate General details appellate defense counsel, who represent the accused before the CCA, CAAF, or the Supreme Court when the accused requests, when the United States is represented by counsel, or when the Judge Advocate General has sent the case to CAAF; the accused may also be represented by civilian counsel at the accused’s own expense (Article 70(c), (d)). In a capital case, at least one appellate defense counsel shall, to the greatest extent practicable, be learned in capital law (Article 70(f)).

Sources

This article is general information about military law, not legal advice for any individual case.