> ## 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 2025
- URL: https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/air-force-article-134-2025/
- Published: 2026-10-28T08:16:16.000Z
- Updated: 2026-10-30T05:23:13.000Z
- Description: Air Force courts-martial charged Article 134 (general article) in 48 cases in 2025. The median confinement was 1 year, lower than the 1.7 years in 2024 and longer than the 6 months 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, 2025

**Short answer:** Air Force courts-martial charged Article 134 (general article) in 48 cases in 2025\. The median confinement was 1 year, lower than the 1.7 years in 2024 and longer than the 6 months across all Air Force cases. Sentences of more than one year were imposed in 21 of 42 convictions (50%), compared with 27% service-wide.

Based on 48 cases · 2025 · Air Force records · data updated October 24, 2026

## A Shorter Median Than in 2024

Sentences in the 2025 general article cases were still longer than the Air Force average, but the median was lower than in 2024\. The median was 1 year, compared with 1.7 years in 2024 and 6 months for all Air Force cases in 2025\. Of 42 convictions, 41 included confinement.

The general court-martial share also went down, from 89% to 67%. The records show both changes in the same year but cannot show whether one caused the other. With 48 cases, a few cases can change these figures.

|                               | 2024      | 2025   |
| ----------------------------- | --------- | ------ |
| Cases                         | 46        | 48     |
| Contested (of pleas recorded) | 21%       | 25%    |
| Convictions with confinement  | 89%       | 98%    |
| Median confinement            | 1.7 years | 1 year |
| Punitive discharge (enlisted) | 92%       | 81%    |
| General courts-martial        | 89%       | 67%    |

## Sentences by Band

Confinement of more than one year was imposed in 21 of 42 convictions (50%), compared with 27% Air Force-wide. Of those, 14 were between 1 and 5 years and 7 were 5 years or more. A quarter of terms were 3 years or longer.

Terms under 6 months were imposed in 13 convictions (31%), compared with 43% for the service. Terms between 6 months and 1 year were imposed in 7 (17%), about the same as the 18% Air Force figure. Only 1 conviction included no confinement, compared with 12% service-wide. These adjudged terms come before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal, and each covers every charge in the case.

| Adjudged confinement            | Convictions | Share here | Share, all Air Force cases in 2025 |
| ------------------------------- | ----------- | ---------- | ---------------------------------- |
| No confinement                  | 1           | 2%         | 12%                                |
| Under 6 months                  | 13          | 31%        | 43%                                |
| 6 months to 1 year              | 7           | 17%        | 18%                                |
| More than 1 year, under 5 years | 14          | 33%        | 15%                                |
| 5 years or more                 | 7           | 17%        | 11%                                |

## General and Special Courts-Martial Compared

These cases included 32 general and 16 special courts-martial. The general share was 67%, compared with 51% across the Air Force. A general court-martial can adjudge long confinement and a dishonorable discharge. A special court-martial caps confinement at one year and cannot impose a dishonorable discharge.

The 32 general courts-martial had a median confinement of 1.7 years. The 16 special courts-martial had a median of 3 months. The contested share was 21% at general courts-martial and 31% at special courts-martial.

## Pleas and Panels

Of 40 cases with a recorded plea, 30 accused pleaded guilty and 10 contested at least one charge. The contested share was 25%, lower than the 41% for all Air Force cases and higher than the 21% in 2024.

The accused usually chooses whether a military judge alone or a panel of members decides guilt. A military judge alone heard 40 of these cases. Members heard 17% of the cases, through 5 enlisted panels and 3 officer panels, compared with 26% service-wide. Members heard 8 of the 10 contested cases (80%). Guilty pleas were mostly heard by a military judge alone.

## Enlisted Discharges and Officer Dismissals

A punitive discharge followed 81% of enlisted convictions: 11 bad-conduct and 19 dishonorable discharges. Across all Air Force cases in 2025, the rate was 60%. In this group's 2024 cases, it was 92%. Of 5 convicted officers or warrant officers, 4 were dismissed.

A sentence without a punitive discharge does not settle the member's status, because administrative separation can follow. Those steps are not in these records.

## Sexual Offenses and Domestic Violence in the Same Cases

Most cases included more than one article: 31 of the 48 charged at least one besides Article 134\. Article 120b (child sexual abuse) was the most common, in 6 cases. Article 128b (domestic violence, numbered since 2019) and Article 128 (assault) appeared in 5 each, Article 120c (indecent recording and exposure) in 4, and Article 112a (drug) in 3.

A sentence covers every charge in a case, so these other charges are included in the confinement figures above. The records do not divide a sentence among charges. They cannot show how much of a term was for the general article.

## Covered Offenses and New Sentencing Rules

Since December 28, 2023, special trial counsel rather than commanders decide whether to prosecute covered offenses such as sexual assault, domestic violence, and murder. When every guilty finding is for an offense after December 27, 2023, the military judge sets the sentence under new parameters. The records have no offense dates, so 2025 trials may include cases under both sets of rules. The data cannot show any effect.

## Rank and Installations

Junior enlisted members (E-1 to E-4) made up 60% of the accused, NCOs 29%, and officers 10%. The junior enlisted share was the same as the Air Force's 60%. Kadena AB, Japan and Fairchild AFB, Washington tried 3 cases each. Hurlburt Field, Florida; Spangdahlem AB, Germany; and Osan AB, South Korea tried 2 each. Together they account for 25% of the cases.

## Limits

Air Force records rarely list charges in full acquittals, so this page gives no acquittal rate for Article 134\. The records also leave out evidence, plea agreement terms, and nonjudicial punishment.

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 2025 that charged Article 134 (48 cases), compared with all Air Force cases that year and with 2024.

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)
- [General Article at Air Force Courts-Martial, 2024: The Year in Numbers](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/air-force-article-134-2024/) (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 2021](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/air-force-article-134-2021/)
- [Air Force Article 134 Cases in 2022](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/air-force-article-134-2022/)
- [General Article at Air Force Courts-Martial, 2020: The Year in Numbers](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/air-force-article-134-2020/)
- [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: [General Article at Air Force Courts-Martial, 2024: The Year in Numbers](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/air-force-article-134-2024/)

**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.