Once a court-martial reaches its trial phase, it moves through a recognizable sequence built specifically for the military system. The findings phase, where guilt is decided, is deliberately separated from sentencing, which comes only after a conviction. Within the findings phase, the steps run in order: selecting and questioning the panel, opening statements, the government’s case, the defense case, and deliberation toward findings, with the military judge ruling on objections and motions throughout. The idea that a military trial is a summary, rubber-stamp affair, or that the defense simply sits and watches, does not match how the process actually runs.
Building and testing the panel #
When the accused has elected to be tried by members rather than by the judge alone, the trial opens with assembling the panel. This is one of the clearest departures from a civilian jury.
Under Rule for Courts-Martial 912, the parties conduct voir dire, questioning prospective members, and then exercise challenges. Two kinds exist:
- Challenges for cause, which remove a member who cannot serve impartially, and have no fixed numerical limit.
- Peremptory challenges, a limited number that may be used without stating a reason within the rules’ constraints.
The panel is drawn from service members the convening authority has detailed, not from a random public jury pool, and the accused may elect to have enlisted members included. That composition and selection method is a defining military difference.
The order of the case #
With the panel seated, the trial proceeds under Rule for Courts-Martial 913 in a familiar order:
| Step | What happens |
|---|---|
| Opening statements | Each side previews its theory of the case |
| Government's case | The prosecution presents evidence and witnesses |
| Defense case | The defense may present evidence and witnesses |
| Closing and instructions | Argument, then the judge instructs the members on the law |
| Deliberation | The members deliberate toward findings |
The prosecution carries the burden and presents first. The defense then has the opportunity to put on its own case, and throughout both sides may cross-examine the other’s witnesses. Far from passive, the defense actively tests the government’s evidence as it comes in.
The judge as referee #
Across every step, the military judge rules on objections to evidence, decides motions, and instructs the members on the governing law before they deliberate. The judge manages the courtroom and the legal questions; in a members case the judge does not decide the facts.
If the accused instead elected trial by judge alone, the same evidentiary sequence plays out, but the judge both rules on the law and decides the findings. The voir dire and member-challenge steps simply do not arise.
Findings, then a separate sentencing #
The trial phase culminates in findings, the decision on guilt for each charge. This is where the military system’s segmented design stands out.
Findings come first and stand on their own. Only if there is a conviction does the case move into a distinct sentencing proceeding, which is governed by its own rules and is not part of the findings phase.
That separation is structural, not incidental. The members or judge resolve guilt without reference to punishment, and the question of sentence is reached afterward as a separate matter. The number of votes required to convict, and the way sentencing now works, are governed by their own rules beyond this findings sequence.
Because how voir dire, evidence, and motions are handled depends heavily on the specific charges and facts, the steps here describe the structure rather than predict any result, and anyone facing a court-martial should consult a qualified military defense attorney about their situation. Answering the title directly: once it begins, the trial phase unfolds as panel selection and challenges, opening statements, the government’s case, the defense case, and deliberation to findings, with the judge presiding throughout and sentencing held as a separate stage afterward.