> ## Content Index > Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.bodiesburied.com/llms.txt > Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further. # What Sentence Follows an Air Force False Official Statement Conviction? - URL: https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/air-force-article-107-sent-2016-2025/ - Published: 2026-10-28T06:33:27.000Z - Updated: 2026-10-30T08:04:45.000Z - Description: Air Force convictions that included Article 107 (false official statement) were seldom sentenced to long confinement. Across 133 such convictions in 2016–2025, the median confinement was 4 months, the same as for all Air Force convictions. - Author: Jocelyn C. Stewart - Tags: Understanding Trends, Article 107, Air Force [Trends](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/) › [By Offense](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/by-offense/) › [Article 107](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/article-107-courts-martial/) › What Sentence Follows a Air Force false **Short answer:** Air Force convictions that included Article 107 (false official statement) were seldom sentenced to long confinement. Across 133 such convictions in 2016–2025, the median confinement was 4 months, the same as for all Air Force convictions. Only 7 of 133 (5%) were sentenced to more than one year, compared with 23% Air Force-wide, and 25% had no confinement. Based on 133 cases · 2016–2025 · Air Force records · data updated October 24, 2026 ## Few Sentences Were Longer Than One Year This page covers Air Force courts-martial that ended in a conviction under Article 107, the article on false official statements. Most of these sentences were short. 4 convictions (3%) were sentenced to more than 1 year and under 5 years, compared with 16% Air Force-wide. 3 convictions (2%) were sentenced to 5 years or more, compared with 7%. 51% were sentenced to under 6 months, compared with 48%. 19% were sentenced to 6 months to 1 year, compared with 15%. A quarter of the terms were 7 months or longer. | Adjudged confinement | Convictions | Share here | Share, all Air Force convictions in those years | | ------------------------------- | ----------- | ---------- | ----------------------------------------------- | | No confinement | 33 | 25% | 15% | | Under 6 months | 68 | 51% | 48% | | 6 months to 1 year | 25 | 19% | 15% | | More than 1 year, under 5 years | 4 | 3% | 16% | | 5 years or more | 3 | 2% | 7% | ## A Quarter Had No Confinement 100 of the 133 convictions included confinement (75%). The other 33 convictions (25%) had no confinement, compared with 15% across Air Force convictions. When confinement was adjudged, the median was 4 months, the same as the Air Force-wide median. These are adjudged sentences, before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal. Each sentence covers every charge in the case. ## Article 107 Was Usually Charged With Other Offenses Only 17 of the 133 cases charged Article 107 by itself. Drug offenses under Article 112a were the most common other charge, in 48 cases. Article 92 orders violations were charged in 37 cases, Article 121 larceny in 30, Article 134, the general article, in 28, and Article 86 unauthorized absence in 24. A sentence covers all charges in the case. Most of the sentences on this page therefore punish a false statement together with other offenses, not a false statement alone. ## Most Cases Were Special Courts-Martial 93 of the 133 cases were special courts-martial and 40 were general courts-martial. The general court-martial share was 30%, compared with 46% across Air Force convictions. A special court-martial caps confinement at one year and cannot impose a dishonorable discharge. A general court-martial can impose any lawful sentence. In the general courts-martial, the median confinement was 7 months and 47% of cases were contested. In the special courts-martial, the median confinement was 3 months and 16% were contested. ## Discharges and Dismissals 67 of 126 convicted enlisted members received a punitive discharge: 60 bad-conduct discharges and 7 dishonorable discharges. Across all Air Force convictions, the punitive discharge share was 56%. 4 of 7 convicted officers or warrant officers were dismissed. A dismissal is the officer equivalent of a punitive discharge. A sentence without a punitive discharge does not rule out a later administrative separation. ## Pleas and Who Decided Guilt Only 53 of the 133 records list a plea. Air Force records from 2016 to 2019 rarely list a guilty plea. Of those 53 cases, 40 were guilty pleas and 13 were contested, meaning a not-guilty or mixed plea. The contested share was 25%, compared with 31% across Air Force convictions. Of the 13 contested cases, 3 ended in a partial acquittal (23%): the accused was found not guilty of at least one charge or specification and guilty of another. A military judge alone decided 98 cases. Members heard the rest: 13 enlisted panels and 22 officer panels. Members heard 26% of cases, compared with 28% Air Force-wide. Members heard 9 of 13 contested cases (69%). The accused usually chooses the forum, and most judge-alone cases are guilty pleas. ## Rank of the Accused The convicted members were 75 junior enlisted members, 51 NCOs, and 7 officers. This group is more senior than all Air Force convictions in those years. ## Case Counts and Locations There were 20 cases in 2016, 13 in 2017, 19 in 2018, 21 in 2019, 14 in 2020, 8 in 2021, 7 in 2022, 7 in 2023, 8 in 2024, and 16 in 2025. Nellis AFB, Nevada, had the most cases, with 11\. Osan AB, South Korea, and Dyess AFB, Texas, each had 6\. JB McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, New Jersey, and McConnell AFB, Kansas, each had 5\. Together these installations account for 25% of the cases. Larger installations try more cases of every kind. ## Why This Page Has No Acquittal Rate Air Force records rarely list the charges in a case that ends in a full acquittal. An acquittal rate for one offense would therefore count too few acquittals, so this page does not give one. The records also give trial dates rather than offense dates, never report plea agreements, and do not show cases handled by nonjudicial punishment or administrative separation. The Military Justice Act of 2016 took effect on January 1, 2019, and new sentencing parameters apply to offenses after December 27, 2023\. Both depend on offense dates, which the records do not give. For what the offense covers and how it is defended, see [Article 107 on the law firm's website](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/practice-areas/court-martial/article-107/?ref=bodiesburied.com). Dates and sources for the law changes: [UCMJ change timeline](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/ucmj-change-timeline/). ### How We Counted Air Force courts-martial tried 2016–2025: ending in a conviction under Article 107 (false official statement) (133 cases), compared with all Air Force convictions in those years. Source: public court-martial records (Article 140a, UCMJ) in [Military Trial Results](https://www.bodiesburied.com/military-trial-results/), data updated October 24, 2026\. Definitions, sources, and known gaps: [how this data was built](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/how-the-military-trial-results-data-was-built/). Errors: content@bodiesburied.com. ## Related Analysis - [Article 107 (False Official Statements): Court-Martial Data and Trends](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/article-107-courts-martial/) (hub) - [Sentences](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/sentences/) (hub) - [Fewer or More? False Official Statement Charges at Air Force Courts-Martial, 2016–2025](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/air-force-article-107-trend-2016-2025/) - [When Air Force Accused Plead Guilty to False Official Statement](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/air-force-article-107-plea-2016-2025/) - [Article 107 Sentences in the Army: Confinement and Discharges, 2021–2025](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-article-107-sent-2021-2025/) (another service) - [Article 107 Sentences in the Navy-Marine Corps: Confinement and Discharges, 2017–2025](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/navy-marine-corps-article-107-sent-2017-2025/) (another service) - [Article 118 Sentences in the Air Force: Confinement and Discharges, 2016–2025](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/air-force-article-118-sent-2016-2025/) - [Article 107 explained on the law firm's website](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/practice-areas/court-martial/article-107/?ref=bodiesburied.com) - [Search every case in Military Trial Results](https://www.bodiesburied.com/military-trial-results/) (members) **About the author.** Jocelyn C. Stewart is a retired Army JAG with more than 24 years of trying courts-martial and more than 200 jury trials. She hosts *Where All The Bodies Are Buried* and runs the [Law Office of Jocelyn C. Stewart](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/?ref=bodiesburied.com). This analysis is for education and information only. It is not legal advice, and every case is different.