NCOs (E-5 to E-9) Charged Under Article 134 in the Air Force

Trends › By Offense › Article 134 › NCOs (E-5 to E-9)

Based on 165 cases · 2016–2025 · Air Force records · data updated October 24, 2026

More Dishonorable Than Bad-Conduct Discharges

Of the punitive discharges given to convicted NCOs, 72 were dishonorable and 35 were bad-conduct. Only a general court-martial can adjudge a dishonorable discharge, the most severe discharge available for an enlisted member.

Together, those discharges followed 66% of enlisted convictions, lower than the 76% across all Air Force Article 134 cases. A sentence without a punitive discharge does not rule out a later administrative separation, which these records do not track.

More Sentences at Both Ends of the Range

The 165 cases resulted in 162 convictions, and 88% included confinement. The median term was 1.2 years, the same as the service-wide median. A quarter of terms were 3.3 years or longer.

Sentences at both ends of the range were more common. No confinement was imposed in 12% of convictions here, compared with 9% across the Air Force. Terms of 5 years or more made up 17%, compared with 13%. Terms of 6 months to 1 year were less common: 14%, compared with 18%.

Overall, 75 of 162 convictions (46%) included more than one year, about the same as the 47% service-wide. Every figure is an adjudged sentence covering all charges in the case, before clemency, appeal, or a plea-agreement cap.

Sentences by Court Level

General courts-martial heard 111 of the cases and special courts-martial 54. The general share was 67%, compared with 73% across all Air Force Article 134 cases. A special court-martial can adjudge no more than one year of confinement and no dishonorable discharge.

At general courts-martial, 96% of convictions included confinement, with a median of 2 years. At special courts-martial, only 72% did, with a median of 2 months. Most of the sentences without confinement were at special courts-martial.

Most Pleaded Guilty

The plea is listed in 79 of the 165 records. Of those, 58 accused pleaded guilty and 21 contested at least one charge, through a not-guilty or mixed plea. The contested share was 27%, about the same as the 28% for all Air Force Article 134 cases.

A military judge alone decided guilt in 126 of the 163 cases with the forum listed (77%). Members heard 37: 19 enlisted panels and 18 officer panels. Of the 21 contested cases, members heard 11 (52%). The accused usually chooses the forum, and guilty pleas are usually heard by a military judge alone.

Other Charges in the Same Cases

In 58 of the 165 cases, Article 134 was the only article charged. Across all Air Force Article 134 cases, the figure was 153 of 500.

When other charges were filed, Article 92 (orders violation) was the most common, in 34 cases. Article 128 (assault) appeared in 22, Article 120b (child sexual abuse) in 20, Article 120 (sexual assault) in 15, and Article 107 (false official statement) in 14.

Fewer Cases in Later Years

Trials took place from January 2016 to September 2025. There were 22 cases in 2016, 22 in 2017, 23 in 2018, and 16 in 2019. From 2020 through 2025, the yearly totals were 11, 15, 14, 10, 18, and 14.

The Military Justice Act of 2016 took effect on January 1, 2019. Since December 28, 2023, special trial counsel have decided whether to prosecute covered offenses. Both rules depend on the offense date, which the records lack. The records therefore cannot show which rules applied to a case or whether either change affected these numbers.

Bases and Rank

JB Pearl Harbor-Hickam, Hawaii and Hill AFB, Utah each tried 9 of these cases. Scott AFB, Illinois tried 7, Nellis AFB, Nevada 6, and Peterson SFB, Colorado 5. Together they account for 22% of the 165 cases. A large installation tries more cases of every kind.

Every accused here was an NCO. In all Air Force Article 134 cases, 59% of the accused were junior enlisted members, so this group is more senior.

What the Records Do Not Show

No acquittal rate appears, because Air Force records rarely list the charges in a full acquittal. Offense dates, evidence, plea agreements, and conduct handled through nonjudicial punishment or administrative separation are also not included. Article 134 covers many kinds of conduct. These figures count it as a single article and do not separate the specific offenses charged under it.

For what the offense covers and how it is defended, see Article 134 on the law firm's website. Dates and sources for the law changes: UCMJ change timeline.

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.