## Facts

- After entering the Coast Guard, Commissaryman Clayton Burry joined the Radio Church of God, which forbade members from working from sunset on Friday until sunrise on Sunday.
- For a time, Burry’s assignments did not interfere with his worship practices.
- Following a later transfer, Burry was required to work on Saturdays on two occasions.
- Burry was then assigned as a cook to the U.S.S. *Tamarack*.
- Burry asked for personal liberty each Saturday so he could observe his faith.
- Because another cook was then assigned to the *Tamarack* and could cover Saturday meals, Burry received Saturday liberty for the first few months.
- The other cook was later transferred, leaving Burry as the only cook aboard the ship.
- The next Friday night, Burry went ashore and did not return until Sunday morning, missing Saturday duties.
- The commanding officer imposed nonjudicial punishment restricting Burry to the ship for seven days, which kept him aboard the following Saturday.
- On that Saturday, the commanding officer ordered Burry to cook; Burry refused, stating he felt more compelled to follow God’s laws than man’s laws.
- A chaplain interviewed Burry and confirmed his religious convictions were sincere.
- Burry was tried by special court-martial for disobeying the order.
- The members were instructed that religious freedom was not a defense to disobedience, but they could consider whether the order was unlawfully given with knowledge Burry would refuse it and solely to increase punishment.
- Burry was convicted and sentenced to hard labor, reduction in rank, and a bad-conduct discharge, and he appealed to the Coast Guard Board of Review.

## Issues

1. Does a servicemember’s sincere religious objection to Saturday work provide a defense to a charge of disobeying an otherwise lawful order to perform assigned duties?
2. Was the order unlawful because it was allegedly given with the commander’s knowledge that Burry would refuse, and solely to increase punishment by creating a disobedience offense?

## Decision

- The Coast Guard Board of Review affirmed the conviction and sentence.
- The Board declined to treat Burry’s sincere religious belief as a legal excuse for refusing to obey an otherwise lawful duty order.
- The Board found no basis to invalidate the order as merely punitive or as lacking a legitimate military purpose.

## Legal Principles

- A servicemember must obey lawful orders; a sincere religious motive does not, by itself, excuse disobedience of an order that is otherwise lawful.
- Religious sincerity may be relevant to evaluate the factual setting, but it does not create an automatic right to refuse performance of assigned military duties.
- An order directed to accomplishing required shipboard functions (such as providing meals) may remain lawful even if it conflicts with a member’s religious practice.
- Commanders may grant religious accommodations when consistent with duty needs, but a prior accommodation does not guarantee continued exemption when staffing or mission needs change.
- An order may be unlawful if issued solely to increase punishment by setting up a member for refusal; the factfinder may consider whether the order served a legitimate military purpose.

## Conclusion

United States v. Burry held that a Coast Guardsman’s sincere Sabbath-based objection did not excuse his refusal to obey a duty order to cook on Saturday where the order served ordinary shipboard needs, and the record did not show the commander issued it solely to increase punishment by provoking disobedience.


United States v. Burry, 36 C.M.R. 829 (1966)