Drug at Air Force Courts-Martial, 2025: The Year in Numbers
Air Force drug convictions in 2025 were sentenced to less confinement than other Air Force cases. Across 45 Article 112a courts-martial, the median confinement was 2 months, compared with 6 months for all Air Force cases in 2025.
Understanding Trends in Military Practice · 6 min read
Trends › By Offense › Article 112a › Air Force, 2025
Short answer: Air Force drug convictions in 2025 were sentenced to less confinement than other Air Force cases. Across 45 Article 112a courts-martial, the median confinement was 2 months, compared with 6 months for all Air Force cases in 2025. 25% of the cases with a plea recorded were contested, compared with 41% Air Force-wide. 50% of convicted enlisted members received a punitive discharge, compared with 60%.
Many Convictions Had No Confinement
74% of the 38 convictions included confinement. The other 10 convictions (26%) had no confinement, compared with 12% for all Air Force cases. In 2024, 79% of drug convictions included confinement.
When confinement was imposed, it was short. Half of the terms were 2 months or less. 23 convictions (61%) were sentenced to under 6 months, compared with 43% Air Force-wide. These are adjudged sentences, meaning the punishment set at trial before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal. Each covers every charge in the case.
| Adjudged confinement | Convictions | Share here | Share, all Air Force cases in 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|
| No confinement | 10 | 26% | 12% |
| Under 6 months | 23 | 61% | 43% |
| 6 months to 1 year | 3 | 8% | 18% |
| More than 1 year, under 5 years | 2 | 5% | 15% |
| 5 years or more | 0 | 0% | 11% |
Few Sentences Were Longer Than One Year
Only 2 of 38 convictions (5%) were sentenced to more than one year of confinement, compared with 27% for all Air Force cases in 2025. No drug sentence was 5 years or more, compared with 11% of sentences across the Air Force. 3 convictions (8%) were sentenced to 6 months to 1 year, compared with 18%.
Only a general court-martial can adjudge more than one year. A special court-martial caps confinement at one year and cannot impose a dishonorable discharge. In 2025, 6 of the 45 drug cases were general courts-martial (13%), compared with 51% of all Air Force cases.
Almost every drug sentence in 2025 was within the limits of a special court-martial. Only 2 were longer than one year.
Guilty Pleas and Contested Cases
36 of the 45 records list a plea. 27 were guilty pleas and 9 were contested, meaning a not-guilty plea to at least one charge. The contested share was 25%, lower than the 33% in 2024 and the 41% for the Air Force overall.
The accused usually chooses between a military judge alone and a panel of members, and most judge-alone cases are guilty pleas. A military judge alone decided 36 cases. Members heard 20% of cases with the forum listed: 5 enlisted panels and 4 officer panels.
Punitive Discharges for 50% of Enlisted Convictions
17 of 34 convicted enlisted members (50%) received a bad-conduct or dishonorable discharge. That was higher than the 39% in 2024 but lower than the 60% for all Air Force cases. Only 1 was dishonorable.
3 of 4 convicted officers and warrant officers were dismissed. A dismissal is the officer equivalent of a punitive discharge. A member sentenced without a punitive discharge may still face administrative separation, which these records do not show.
Changes Since 2024
There were 47 drug cases in 2024 and 45 in 2025. The median confinement was 2 months in both years. The general court-martial share was 21% in 2024 and 13% in 2025. The contested share was 33% in 2024 and 25% in 2025. In groups this small, a few cases can account for a change.
| 2024 | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
| Cases | 47 | 45 |
| Contested (of pleas recorded) | 33% | 25% |
| Convictions with confinement | 79% | 74% |
| Median confinement | 2 months | 2 months |
| Punitive discharge (enlisted) | 39% | 50% |
| General courts-martial | 21% | 13% |
Which Other Offenses Were Charged?
Article 112a was the only charge in 23 of 45 cases. In the other cases, Article 92 (orders violation) was the most common other charge, in 13 cases. Article 107 (false official statement) and Article 86 (AWOL) were each charged in 5, and Article 128 (assault) and Article 134 (general article) in 3 each.
Every adjudged sentence covers the whole case. The sentencing figures above therefore include cases with other offenses besides the drug charge. The records do not separate the punishment for the drug charge from the punishment for the other charges.
Rank of the Accused and Installations
The accused were 32 junior enlisted members, 9 NCOs, and 4 officers. This group is more junior than all Air Force cases in 2025.
No installation had more than 3 cases. Seymour Johnson AFB, North Carolina, JB Langley-Eustis, Virginia, and Eglin AFB, Florida, each tried 3. Hurlburt Field, Florida, and Davis-Monthan AFB, Arizona, each tried 2. These installations account for 29% of the 45 cases. Larger bases try more cases of every kind.
Rule Changes and What the Records Do Not Show
Since December 28, 2023, special trial counsel instead of commanders decide whether to prosecute covered offenses such as sexual assault, domestic violence, and murder. A military judge sets the sentence within new parameters when every guilty finding is for an offense after December 27, 2023. The records do not give offense dates, so 2025 trials include cases under both the old and new rules. The data cannot show whether the changes affected drug case results.
Air Force records rarely list the charges in full acquittals and never report plea agreements, so this page gives no acquittal rate. The records also do not show the evidence or drug cases handled by nonjudicial punishment.
For what the offense covers and how it is defended, see Article 112a on the law firm's website. Dates and sources for the law changes: UCMJ change timeline.
How We Counted
Air Force courts-martial with a trial date in 2025 that charged Article 112a (45 cases), compared with all Air Force cases that year and with 2024.
Source: public court-martial records (Article 140a, UCMJ) in Military Trial Results, data updated October 24, 2026. Definitions, sources, and known gaps: how this data was built. Errors: content@bodiesburied.com.
Related Analysis
- Article 112a (Wrongful Use, Possession of Controlled Substances): Court-Martial Data and Trends (hub)
- By Year (hub)
- How Air Force Drug Cases Ended in 2024 (previous / next)
- Are Air Force Drug Courts-Martial Disappearing? Article 112a, 2016–2025 (the full trend)
- Air Force Article 112a Cases in 2017
- Air Force Article 112a Cases in 2021
- Air Force Article 112a Cases in 2022
- Drug at Air Force Courts-Martial, 2019: The Year in Numbers
- Drug at Air Force Courts-Martial, 2020: The Year in Numbers
- S3 E52: What You Need to Know About Positive UAs in the Military (podcast, members)
- Article 112a explained on the law firm's website
- Search every case in Military Trial Results (members)
Compare: federal court. Drug Use: Federal Sentences vs. Air Force Courts-Martial, 2016–2025 · Drug Distribution: Federal Sentences vs. Air Force Courts-Martial, 2016–2025
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. This analysis is for education and information only. It is not legal advice, and every case is different.