Junior Enlisted (E-1 to E-4) Charged Under Article 118 in the Air Force
The Air Force records show 11 courts-martial of junior enlisted members (E-1 to E-4) charged under Article 118 between July 2016 and October 2024. Each of the 10 convictions included confinement, and the median term was 32 years. All 10 convicted members received a dishonorable discharge.
Understanding Trends in Military Practice · 4 min read
Trends › By Offense › Article 118 › Junior Enlisted (E-1 to E-4)
Short answer: The Air Force records show 11 courts-martial of junior enlisted members (E-1 to E-4) charged under Article 118 between July 2016 and October 2024. Each of the 10 convictions included confinement, and the median term was 32 years. All 10 convicted members received a dishonorable discharge.
Median Confinement of 32 Years
10 cases ended in a conviction, and all 10 sentences included confinement. The median confinement was 32 years, the same as the median for all Air Force Article 118 cases.
A quarter of the confinement terms were 35 years or longer, and 2 of the sentences were life sentences. These are adjudged sentences, as announced at trial, before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal. They also cover every charge in the case, not only Article 118.
Dishonorable Discharge in Every Conviction
10 of the 10 convicted members received a punitive discharge, and all 10 were dishonorable discharges. None received a bad-conduct discharge. In all Air Force Article 118 cases, the share with a punitive discharge was also 100%.
Only a general court-martial can adjudge a dishonorable discharge. A special court-martial can adjudge a bad-conduct discharge but not a dishonorable discharge.
Who Decided Guilt?
A military judge alone decided guilt in 6 of the 11 cases (55%). Members heard the other 5: 3 enlisted panels and 2 officer panels.
The accused usually chooses whether a military judge alone or a panel of members decides guilt. The records do not show the reasons for that choice.
Other Charges in the Same Cases
4 of the 11 cases charged Article 118 by itself. Across all Air Force Article 118 cases, 4 of 12 did.
Assault under Article 128 was the most common companion charge, in 3 cases. Obstruction under Article 131b (numbered since 2019), drug offenses under Article 112a, and the general article, Article 134, each appeared in 2. Sexual assault under Article 120 appeared in 1.
Who Was Charged, and When
Junior enlisted members accounted for 92% of the accused in all Air Force Article 118 cases, so this group covers most of the Air Force cases under this article.
The yearly counts were 1 in 2016, 3 in 2017, 2 in 2018, 1 in 2019, 1 in 2020, 1 in 2021, 1 in 2022, 0 in 2023, 1 in 2024, and 0 in 2025. No year had more than 3 trials.
Law Changes During These Years
The Military Justice Act of 2016 took effect on January 1, 2019. It set fixed panel sizes and introduced written plea agreements. Cases with offenses from before 2019 kept the old rules.
Article 118 is a covered offense. Since December 28, 2023, special trial counsel, not commanders, decide whether to prosecute covered offenses. When every guilty finding is for an offense after December 27, 2023, the military judge sets the sentence within new sentencing parameters. The records give trial dates rather than offense dates, so they cannot show which rules applied to a given case.
Limits of the Records
These records contain no plea counts for these cases, and Air Force records never report plea agreements. From 2016 to 2019 they rarely list a guilty plea at all. They also rarely list the charges in a full acquittal, so this page gives no acquittal rate. The evidence and any plea terms are not described.
Dates and sources for the law changes mentioned here: UCMJ change timeline.
How We Counted
Air Force courts-martial tried 2016–2025 that charged junior enlisted members (E-1 to E-4) under Article 118 (11 cases), compared with every Air Force Article 118 case.
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 118 (Murder): Court-Martial Data and Trends (hub)
- Air Force Courts-Martial: Data and Trends (hub)
- Is Army Murder Prosecution Rising or Falling? Article 118, 2021–2025
- How Has Article 118 Changed in Navy-Marine Corps Courts-Martial Since 2017?
- Air Force AWOL Cases Against NCOs (E-5 to E-9): Outcomes and Sentences
- Air Force Assault Cases Against Officers: Outcomes and Sentences
- Air Force Attempt Cases Against Junior Enlisted (E-1 to E-4): Outcomes and Sentences
- Air Force Child Sexual Abuse Cases Against Junior Enlisted (E-1 to E-4): Outcomes and Sentences
- Air Force Domestic Violence Cases Against NCOs (E-5 to E-9): Outcomes and Sentences
- Search every case in Military Trial Results (members)
Compare: federal court. Murder: Federal Sentences vs. Air Force Courts-Martial
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.