In the United States, courts-martial are conducted under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), 10 U.S.C.

Until 1920, court-martial convictions were reviewed either by a commander in the field or by the President, depending on the severity of the sentence or the rank of the accused.

Following the war, in the Act of June 4, 1920, Congress required the Army to establish Boards of Review, consisting of three lawyers, to consider cases involving death, dismissal of an officer, an unsuspended dishonorable discharge, or confinement in a penitentiary, with limited exceptions.

The legislation further required legal review of other cases in the Office of the Judge Advocate General.

The military justice system commonly uses four writs: mandamus, prohibition, error coram nobis, and habeas corpus.

It allows the court to review error of fact or a retroactive change in the law that which affects the validity of the prior proceeding.

Such action includes setting aside or modifying the findings and/or the sentence, ordering a rehearing, and dismissing charges and specifications.

Unless reversed by a higher court, such action is binding on all parties, including all officials of the United States.

The Courts of Criminal Appeals review cases for legal error, factual sufficiency, and sentence appropriateness.

After such review, the Judge Advocate General may refer a case to the appropriate Court of Criminal Appeals.