Junior Enlisted (E-1 to E-4) Charged Under Article 90 in the Air Force
Junior enlisted members (E-1 to E-4) were the accused in 30 Air Force courts-martial under Article 90, disobeying a superior commissioned officer, between 2016 and 2025. Their median confinement was 8 months, about the same as the 7 months across all Air Force Article 90 cases.
Understanding Trends in Military Practice · 5 min read
Trends › By Offense › Article 90 › Junior Enlisted (E-1 to E-4)
Short answer: Junior enlisted members (E-1 to E-4) were the accused in 30 Air Force courts-martial under Article 90, disobeying a superior commissioned officer, between 2016 and 2025. Their median confinement was 8 months, about the same as the 7 months across all Air Force Article 90 cases. Of the cases with a plea recorded, 33% were contested, compared with 29%.
Disobedience Was Charged With Other Offenses
Only 1 of the 30 cases charged Article 90 by itself. Across all Air Force Article 90 cases, only 3 of 43 did.
Drug charges under Article 112a were the most common companion charge, in 12 cases. Article 128 (assault) and Article 86 (AWOL) each appeared in 8 cases. Article 134 (general article) and Article 92 (orders violation) each appeared in 6. Every sentence below covers all of the charges in the case, not the disobedience alone.
Confinement in Almost Every Conviction
The records show 29 convictions, and 28 of them included confinement. Only 1 (3%) did not, compared with 10% across all Air Force Article 90 cases.
The median confinement was 8 months, about the same as the 7 months across the service. A quarter of sentences were 1 year or longer. These are adjudged sentences, as announced at trial, before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal.
Most Sentences Were 6 Months to 1 Year
Sentences of 6 months to 1 year made up 45% of convictions here, the largest group. Across the Air Force, the share was 38%. Sentences under 6 months made up 34%, compared with 36%.
Sentences of more than one year came in 5 of 29 convictions (17%), the same 17% as across the service. In both groups, 10% were more than 1 year but under 5 years, and 7% were 5 years or more.
| Adjudged confinement | Convictions | Share here | Share, all Air Force Article 90 cases |
|---|---|---|---|
| No confinement | 1 | 3% | 10% |
| Under 6 months | 10 | 34% | 36% |
| 6 months to 1 year | 13 | 45% | 38% |
| More than 1 year, under 5 years | 3 | 10% | 10% |
| 5 years or more | 2 | 7% | 7% |
How Often Was There a Punitive Discharge?
A punitive discharge followed 69% of enlisted convictions in this group, compared with 67% across all Air Force Article 90 cases. The courts adjudged 16 bad-conduct discharges and 4 dishonorable discharges.
A general or special court-martial can impose a bad-conduct discharge. Only a general court-martial can impose a dishonorable discharge. A sentence without a punitive discharge does not rule out a later administrative separation, which these records do not cover.
Fewer General Courts-Martial
Special courts-martial heard 17 of these cases, and general courts-martial heard 13. The general court-martial share was 43%, lower than the 53% for all Air Force Article 90 cases. A special court-martial caps confinement at one year. A general court-martial can impose any lawful sentence.
The median confinement was 1 year at general courts-martial and 5 months at special courts-martial. Only a general court-martial can adjudge more than one year, so all 5 sentences longer than one year came from general courts-martial. With counts this small, a few cases can change these figures.
Pleas and Who Decided Guilt
The plea is listed in 18 of the 30 records. Air Force records from 2016 to 2019 rarely list a guilty plea. Of those 18, 12 accused pleaded guilty and 6 entered a not-guilty or mixed plea. That is 33% contested, compared with 29% across the service.
A military judge alone decided 21 cases, an enlisted panel 5, and an officer panel 4. Members heard 30% of cases, about the same as the 28% for all Air Force Article 90 cases. The accused usually chooses the forum, and most guilty pleas are decided by a military judge alone.
Years, Installations, and Rank
The cases were tried from May 2016 to December 2025. No year had more than 6. The counts were 1 in 2016, 1 in 2017, 4 in 2018, 4 in 2019, 3 in 2020, 1 in 2021, 4 in 2022, 5 in 2023, 1 in 2024, and 6 in 2025.
JBSA - Lackland, Texas, tried 3 cases. Holloman AFB, New Mexico, Shaw AFB, South Carolina, Kirtland AFB, New Mexico, and Osan AB, South Korea, tried 2 each. These 5 installations account for 37% of the cases. Larger installations try more cases of every kind, so a high count alone says little about any one installation.
All 30 accused were junior enlisted. Across all Air Force Article 90 cases, 70% of the accused were junior enlisted.
What the Records Do Not Show
The records give trial dates, not offense dates. They cannot place cases under the rules before or after January 1, 2019, or December 28, 2023. They do not show the order involved, the evidence, plea terms, or nonjudicial punishment. Air Force records rarely list charges in a full acquittal, so no acquittal rate is given.
For what the offense covers and how it is defended, see Article 90 on the law firm's website. Dates and sources for the law changes: 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 90 (30 cases), compared with every Air Force Article 90 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 90 (Willfully Disobeying Superior Officer): Court-Martial Data and Trends (hub)
- Air Force Courts-Martial: Data and Trends (hub)
- What Happens to Army Junior Enlisted (E-1 to E-4) Facing Disobeying An Officer Charges?
- What Happens to Army NCOs (E-5 to E-9) Facing Disobeying An Officer Charges?
- What Happens to Navy-Marine Corps Junior Enlisted (E-1 to E-4) Facing Disobeying An Officer Charges?
- Is Army Disobeying An Officer Prosecution Rising or Falling? Article 90, 2021–2025
- Air Force Article 90 Cases by the Numbers, 2016–2025
- Article 90 explained on the law firm's website
- Search every case in 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. This analysis is for education and information only. It is not legal advice, and every case is different.