> ## 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. # Air Force Drunken Or Reckless Driving Cases Against Junior Enlisted (E-1 to E-4): Outcomes and Sentences - URL: https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/air-force-article-113-junior-enlisted/ - Published: 2026-10-28T08:19:04.000Z - Updated: 2026-10-28T08:40:20.000Z - Description: From 2021–2025, the Air Force tried 35 junior enlisted members (E-1 to E-4) for drunken or reckless driving under Article 113. 49% of those convicted received a punitive discharge, compared with 43% for all Air Force Article 113 cases. - Author: Jocelyn C. Stewart - Tags: Understanding Trends, Article 113, Air Force [Trends](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/) › [By Offense](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/by-offense/) › [Article 113](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/article-113-courts-martial/) › Junior Enlisted (E-1 to E-4) **Short answer:** From 2021–2025, the Air Force tried 35 junior enlisted members (E-1 to E-4) for drunken or reckless driving under Article 113\. 49% of those convicted received a punitive discharge, compared with 43% for all Air Force Article 113 cases. The median confinement was 3 months, compared with 4 months. Based on 35 cases · 2021–2025 · Air Force records · data updated October 24, 2026 ## Punitive Discharges Were More Common 17 of the 35 convicted junior enlisted members received a punitive discharge. All 17 were bad-conduct discharges, and 0 were dishonorable. The 49% share is higher than the 43% across all Air Force Article 113 cases. A punitive discharge is imposed by the court-martial as part of the sentence. A member sentenced without one can still face an administrative separation. These records do not show administrative separations. ## Most Sentences Included Confinement All 35 cases ended with a conviction on at least one charge. 33 of the sentences included confinement (94%). The median confinement was 3 months, slightly shorter than the 4 months for all Air Force Article 113 cases. A quarter of terms were 6 months or longer. Only 2 convictions (6%) had no confinement, compared with 10% for all Air Force Article 113 cases. 22 convictions (63%) were sentenced to under 6 months, close to the 61% for the offense as a whole. These are adjudged sentences, set at trial before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal. | Adjudged confinement | Convictions | Share here | Share, all Air Force Article 113 cases | | ------------------------------- | ----------- | ---------- | -------------------------------------- | | No confinement | 2 | 6% | 10% | | Under 6 months | 22 | 63% | 61% | | 6 months to 1 year | 6 | 17% | 14% | | More than 1 year, under 5 years | 4 | 11% | 10% | | 5 years or more | 1 | 3% | 6% | ## Sentences Longer Than One Year 5 of 35 convictions (14%) were sentenced to more than one year, about the same as the 16% for all Air Force Article 113 cases. 4 of those were between 1 year and 5 years, and 1 was 5 years or more. Only a general court-martial can adjudge more than one year. These cases included 5 general courts-martial and 30 special courts-martial. The general court-martial share was 14%, lower than the 21% for the offense overall. A special court-martial caps confinement at one year and cannot impose a dishonorable discharge. ## Most Cases Included Other Charges In 26 of the 35 cases, at least one other article was charged. Orders violations under Article 92 were the most common other charge, in 12 cases. Drug offenses under Article 112a were charged in 9. Assault under Article 128, the general article (Article 134), and resisting apprehension under Article 87a were each charged in 5 cases. Every sentence covers all the charges in a case, so these offenses are part of the punishment figures. ## Pleas and Contested Cases 33 of the 35 records list a plea. Of those, 24 accused pleaded guilty and 9 contested at least one charge, meaning a not-guilty or mixed plea. The contested share was 27%, slightly lower than the 31% for all Air Force Article 113 cases. Only 2 records do not list a plea. The plea figures here therefore cover almost all of the cases. ## Panels Heard Few Cases The accused usually chooses whether a military judge alone or a panel of members decides guilt. A military judge alone heard 29 of these cases. Enlisted panels heard 3, and officer panels heard 3. Members heard 17% of the cases, compared with 21% for all Air Force Article 113 cases. Most judge-alone cases are guilty pleas, so the split between judge and members follows the low contested share. ## Cases by Year The 35 cases were tried from January 2021 to December 2025\. There were 11 cases in 2021, the highest yearly count. There were 6 in 2022, 5 in 2023, 4 in 2024, and 9 in 2025. Junior enlisted members were 67% of the accused in all Air Force Article 113 cases. They are the largest rank group for drunken and reckless driving cases in the Air Force. ## Installations JB McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, New Jersey, tried 5 of these cases, more than any other base. JB Pearl Harbor-Hickam, Hawaii, Creech AFB, Nevada, MacDill AFB, Florida, and Aviano AB, Italy, each tried 2\. Together they account for 37% of the cases. The rest were tried at many other bases. Larger installations try more cases of every kind, so a high count alone does not mean a base has a problem with this offense. ## Law Changes and What the Records Do Not Show Since December 28, 2023, special trial counsel, rather than commanders, decide whether to prosecute covered offenses. Military judges set sentences when every guilty finding is for an offense after December 27, 2023\. Both changes depend on the offense date, which the records do not include. Trials from 2024 on therefore include cases under both the old and new rules. 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 nonjudicial punishment. For what the offense covers and how it is defended, see [Article 113 on the law firm's website](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/practice-areas/court-martial/article-113/?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 2021–2025 that charged junior enlisted members (E-1 to E-4) under Article 113 (35 cases), compared with every Air Force Article 113 case. 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 113 (Misbehavior of a Sentinel Before 2019, Drunken or Reckless Driving Since): Court-Martial Data and Trends](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/article-113-courts-martial/) (hub) - [Air Force Courts-Martial: Data and Trends](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/air-force-courts-martial/) (hub) - [What Happens to Army Junior Enlisted (E-1 to E-4) Facing Drunken Or Reckless Driving Charges?](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-article-113-junior-enlisted/) - [NCOs (E-5 to E-9) Charged Under Article 113 in the Army](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-article-113-ncos/) - [What Happens to Navy-Marine Corps Junior Enlisted (E-1 to E-4) Facing Drunken Or Reckless Driving Charges?](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/navy-marine-corps-article-113-junior-enlisted/) - [Is Army Drunken Or Reckless Driving Prosecution Rising or Falling? Article 113, 2021–2025](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-article-113-trend-2021-2025/) - [Air Force Article 113 Cases by the Numbers, 2021–2025](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/air-force-article-113-trend-2021-2025/) - [Article 113 explained on the law firm's website](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/practice-areas/court-martial/article-113/?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.