> ## 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 Article 134 Cases in 2022
- URL: https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/air-force-article-134-2022/
- Published: 2026-10-28T08:16:13.000Z
- Updated: 2026-10-30T05:23:10.000Z
- Description: Air Force courts-martial charged Article 134 (general article) in 42 cases in 2022. Sentences of more than one year were imposed in 25 of 42 convictions (60%), compared with 28% across all Air Force cases.
- Author: Jocelyn C. Stewart
- Tags: Understanding Trends, Article 134, Air Force

[Trends](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/) › [By Offense](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/by-offense/) › [Article 134](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/article-134-courts-martial/) › Air Force, 2022

**Short answer:** Air Force courts-martial charged Article 134 (general article) in 42 cases in 2022\. Sentences of more than one year were imposed in 25 of 42 convictions (60%), compared with 28% across all Air Force cases. Only 24% of the cases were contested, compared with 47% service-wide, and 82% of convicted enlisted members received a punitive discharge.

Based on 42 cases · 2022 · Air Force records · data updated October 24, 2026

## Most Sentences Were Longer Than One Year

The largest difference in the 2022 general article cases was the share of long sentences. Confinement of more than one year was imposed in 25 of 42 convictions, or 60%. Across all Air Force cases in 2022, the figure was 28%.

Most of those terms were between 1 and 5 years: 22 convictions, or 52%, compared with 21% service-wide. Another 3 were 5 years or more, a 7% share, the same as the Air Force rate. Terms under 6 months made up only 19% of convictions here, compared with 46% of all Air Force convictions.

| Adjudged confinement            | Convictions | Share here | Share, all Air Force cases in 2022 |
| ------------------------------- | ----------- | ---------- | ---------------------------------- |
| No confinement                  | 1           | 2%         | 10%                                |
| Under 6 months                  | 8           | 19%        | 46%                                |
| 6 months to 1 year              | 8           | 19%        | 16%                                |
| More than 1 year, under 5 years | 22          | 52%        | 21%                                |
| 5 years or more                 | 3           | 7%         | 7%                                 |

## Almost Every Conviction Included Confinement

All 42 cases ended in a conviction on at least one charge, and 41 of those sentences included confinement (98%). The median was 1.2 years, compared with 6 months for the Air Force as a whole. A quarter of terms were 2.5 years or longer.

Each of these is an adjudged sentence: the term announced at trial, before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal. Each one also covers every charge in the case, not only the Article 134 charge.

## Few Cases Were Contested

Guilty pleas resolved 32 of the 42 cases, and 10 were contested. A contested case is one where the accused pleads not guilty to at least one charge. The contested share was 24%, compared with 47% for all Air Force cases that year. It was also lower than the 41% in 2021.

Most of the confinement here therefore followed guilty pleas. The records cannot connect those pleas to any plea agreement terms.

Of the 10 contested cases, 3 ended in a partial acquittal (30%): the accused was found not guilty of at least one charge or specification and guilty of another.

## Few Panels

The accused usually chooses whether a military judge alone or a panel of members decides guilt. A military judge alone heard 38 of the cases. Members heard only 4: 2 enlisted panels and 2 officer panels. Members heard 10% of cases, compared with 32% across the Air Force.

Among the 10 contested cases, members heard 4 (40%). The low panel share follows from the high share of guilty pleas, which are usually heard by a military judge alone.

## Mostly General Courts-Martial

General courts-martial tried 34 of the 42 cases (81%), compared with 57% for all Air Force cases in 2022\. That court level can impose any lawful sentence, including long confinement and a dishonorable discharge. A special court-martial caps confinement at one year and cannot impose a dishonorable discharge.

Terms of more than one year and the 19 dishonorable discharges could only come from general courts-martial. Since 2019, a special court-martial can also be tried by a military judge alone, capped at six months with no punitive discharge. The records here do not report those trials separately.

## Discharges and Dismissals

Of 38 convicted enlisted members, 31 received a bad-conduct or dishonorable discharge (82%). That is more often than the 59% Air Force rate. Of those 31, 19 were dishonorable. All 4 convicted officers or warrant officers were dismissed.

A sentence without a punitive discharge does not rule out a later administrative separation. Those actions are not in this data.

## Most Cases Had No Other Charge

Only 17 of the 42 cases charged any article besides Article 134\. Among those, Article 92 (orders violation) appeared in 5, Article 128 (assault) and Article 120b (child sexual abuse) in 4 each, Article 112a (drug) in 3, and Article 115 (communicating threats) in 2\. In most cases, the general article was the only charge.

## Compared With 2021

The number of cases went from 39 to 42\. The median confinement was 1.2 years in both years. The share of convictions with confinement went from 95% to 98%. The enlisted punitive discharge rate went from 71% to 82%. The general court-martial share went from 85% to 81%. A few cases can change numbers in groups this small.

|                               | 2021      | 2022      |
| ----------------------------- | --------- | --------- |
| Cases                         | 39        | 42        |
| Contested (of pleas recorded) | 41%       | 24%       |
| Convictions with confinement  | 95%       | 98%       |
| Median confinement            | 1.2 years | 1.2 years |
| Punitive discharge (enlisted) | 71%       | 82%       |
| General courts-martial        | 85%       | 81%       |

## Rank and Installations

Junior enlisted members (E-1 to E-4) made up 57% of the accused, NCOs 33%, and officers 10%. That is about the same as the 58% junior enlisted share Air Force-wide. Minot AFB, North Dakota tried 3 cases. Kadena AB, Japan; Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio; Laughlin AFB, Texas; and JB McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, New Jersey tried 2 each. Together they account for 26% of the cases. Larger bases try more cases of every kind.

## Limits of the Records

Air Force records rarely list charges in a full acquittal, so no Article 134 acquittal rate appears. The data also lacks offense dates, evidence, plea agreement terms, and cases closed by nonjudicial punishment or administrative separation.

For what the offense covers and how it is defended, see [Article 134 on the law firm's website](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/practice-areas/court-martial/article-134/?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 with a trial date in 2022 that charged Article 134 (42 cases), compared with all Air Force cases that year and with 2021.

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 134 (General Article): Court-Martial Data and Trends](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/article-134-courts-martial/) (hub)
- [By Year](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/by-year/) (hub)
- [Air Force Article 134 Cases in 2021](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/air-force-article-134-2021/) (previous / next)
- [How Air Force General Article Cases Ended in 2023](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/air-force-article-134-2023/) (previous / next)
- [Air Force Article 134 Cases by the Numbers, 2016–2025](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/air-force-article-134-trend-2016-2025/) (the full trend)
- [Air Force Article 134 Cases in 2016](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/air-force-article-134-2016/)
- [Air Force Article 134 Cases in 2018](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/air-force-article-134-2018/)
- [Air Force Article 134 Cases in 2025](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/air-force-article-134-2025/)
- [What Sentence Follows an Air Force General Article Conviction?](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/air-force-article-134-sent-2016-2025/)
- [Article 134 explained on the law firm's website](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/practice-areas/court-martial/article-134/?ref=bodiesburied.com)
- [Search every case in Military Trial Results](https://www.bodiesburied.com/military-trial-results/) (members)

← Previous: [Air Force Article 134 Cases in 2021](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/air-force-article-134-2021/)Next: [How Air Force General Article Cases Ended in 2023](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/air-force-article-134-2023/) →

**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.