How Air Force Orders Violation Cases Ended in 2020
None of the 29 Air Force courts-martial that charged Article 92 (orders violation) in 2020 charged it alone. Confinement followed 97% of convictions, and the median of 4 months was the same as across the Air Force.
Understanding Trends in Military Practice · 5 min read
Trends › By Offense › Article 92 › Air Force, 2020
Short answer: None of the 29 Air Force courts-martial that charged Article 92 (orders violation) in 2020 charged it alone. Confinement followed 97% of convictions, and the median of 4 months was the same as across the Air Force. Only 22% of cases with a recorded plea were contested, compared with 48% across the service.
Never the Only Charge
In 2020, 0 of the 29 cases charged Article 92 by itself. Every orders violation was charged with at least one other offense. Article 112a (drug) was the most common companion charge, in 14 cases. Article 128 (assault) appeared in 9, Article 86 (AWOL) and Article 107 (false official statement) in 5 each, and Article 128b (domestic violence, numbered since 2019) in 4.
A sentence covers every charge in a case, so the figures on this page describe whole cases. The records give one sentence per case and do not show how much of it was for the orders violation.
Most Accused Pleaded Guilty
Of the 27 records that list a plea, 21 were guilty pleas and 6 were contested. A contested case is one where the accused pleads not guilty to at least one charge. The contested share was 22%, lower than the 48% for all Air Force cases in 2020.
The accused usually chooses whether a military judge alone or a panel of members decides guilt. A military judge alone decided 24 of 29 cases (83%). Members heard 5: 2 enlisted panels and 3 officer panels.
Confinement Was Almost Always Imposed
Confinement was part of 97% of the 29 convictions. The median confinement was 4 months, the same as for all Air Force cases that year. A quarter of the sentences were 10 months or longer. These are adjudged sentences, set at trial before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal.
Most sentences were under one year. Sentences under 6 months came in 17 convictions (59%), about the same as the 60% across the service. Sentences of 6 months to 1 year came in 8 (28%), compared with 13%. Only 1 conviction included no confinement.
| Adjudged confinement | Convictions | Share here | Share, all Air Force cases in 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|
| No confinement | 1 | 3% | 7% |
| Under 6 months | 17 | 59% | 60% |
| 6 months to 1 year | 8 | 28% | 13% |
| More than 1 year, under 5 years | 3 | 10% | 15% |
| 5 years or more | 0 | 0% | 5% |
Few Sentences Over One Year
Sentences longer than one year came in 3 of 29 convictions (10%), compared with 20% for the Air Force. All 3 were between 1 and 5 years. None was 5 years or more. Sentences of 5 years or more made up 5% of Air Force convictions.
Only a general court-martial can adjudge more than one year of confinement or a dishonorable discharge. General courts-martial heard 11 of 29 cases (38%). Their median confinement was 6 months, and 20% of their cases were contested. The 18 special courts-martial, capped at one year, had a median of 4 months, and 24% were contested. Contested shares were about the same at both levels.
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 do not identify those trials.
Fewer Punitive Discharges Than the Air Force Average
Of 29 convicted enlisted members, 13 received a punitive discharge: 12 bad-conduct and 1 dishonorable. The Air Force share in 2020 was 50%.
A punitive discharge is a bad-conduct or dishonorable discharge imposed as part of the sentence. A sentence without one does not rule out a later administrative separation, which these records do not include.
All Enlisted, Mostly Junior
By rank, the accused were 21 junior enlisted members, 8 NCOs, and 0 officers. The group was more junior than all Air Force cases in 2020. No officers were charged, so no case here could end in a dismissal. Every discharge figure on this page concerns enlisted members only.
Changes Since 2019
The number of cases was 38 in 2019 and 29 in 2020. The median confinement was 4 months in both years. The share of convictions with any confinement was 82% in 2019 and 97% in 2020. The enlisted punitive discharge rate was 56% and then 45%. The general court-martial share was 32% and then 38%.
Plea data appears for 2020 but not for 2019, when Air Force records rarely listed a guilty plea. In groups this small, a few cases can change each figure.
| 2019 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|
| Cases | 38 | 29 |
| Contested (of pleas recorded) | — | 22% |
| Convictions with confinement | 82% | 97% |
| Median confinement | 4 months | 4 months |
| Punitive discharge (enlisted) | 56% | 45% |
| General courts-martial | 32% | 38% |
Installations
No installation tried more than 2 cases. Fairchild AFB, Washington, Holloman AFB, New Mexico, Nellis AFB, Nevada, USAF Academy, Colorado, and Dyess AFB, Texas, had 2 each. Together they account for 34% of the 29 cases. Larger installations try more cases of every kind.
What the Records Do Not Show
Air Force records rarely list charges in a case that ends in a full acquittal, so no Article 92 acquittal rate is given. The records also do not include offense dates, evidence, plea agreement terms, or orders violations handled by nonjudicial punishment.
For what the offense covers and how it is defended, see Article 92 on the law firm's website. Dates and sources for the law changes: UCMJ change timeline.
How We Counted
Air Force courts-martial with a trial date in 2020 that charged Article 92 (29 cases), compared with all Air Force cases that year and with 2019.
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 92 (Failure to Obey Order or Regulation): Court-Martial Data and Trends (hub)
- By Year (hub)
- Orders Violation at Air Force Courts-Martial, 2019: The Year in Numbers (previous / next)
- Air Force Article 92 Cases in 2021 (previous / next)
- Air Force Article 92 Cases by the Numbers, 2016–2025 (the full trend)
- Air Force Article 92 Cases in 2023
- Air Force Article 92 Cases in 2024
- How Air Force Orders Violation Cases Ended in 2022
- What Sentence Follows an Air Force Orders Violation Conviction?
- Article 92 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.