April 2025 at Air Force Courts-Martial: 13 Cases
Air Force records list 13 courts-martial in April 2025. Article 92 (orders violation) was charged in 50% of the cases with charges listed, compared with 17% for the Air Force across 2025.
Understanding Trends in Military Practice · 5 min read
Short answer: Air Force records list 13 courts-martial in April 2025. Article 92 (orders violation) was charged in 50% of the cases with charges listed, compared with 17% for the Air Force across 2025. A punitive discharge followed 80% of enlisted convictions, against 60% for the year, while the median confinement was 3 months, against 6 months.
Orders Violations Led the Charge List
Charges are listed in 12 of the 13 records, and each article counts once per case. Article 92 (orders violation), failure to obey an order or regulation, appeared in 6 cases (50%). Across the Air Force in 2025, it appeared in 17% of cases.
Article 134 (general article) and Article 112a (wrongful use, possession of controlled substances) each appeared in 3 cases (25%), about the same as their shares for the year (23% and 21%). Article 128b (domestic violence) appeared in 2 cases (17%). Article 120, Article 90, Article 113, and Article 86 appeared in 1 case each.
| UCMJ Article | Cases | Share here | Share, the Air Force for all of 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Art. 92 Failure to obey order or regulation | 6 | 50% | 17% |
| Art. 134 General article | 3 | 25% | 23% |
| Art. 112a Wrongful use, possession of controlled substances | 3 | 25% | 21% |
| Art. 128b Domestic violence | 2 | 17% | 16% |
| Art. 120 Rape and sexual assault | 1 | 8% | 14% |
| Art. 90 Willfully disobeying superior officer | 1 | 8% | 4% |
| Art. 113 Drunken or reckless operation of vehicle | 1 | 8% | 6% |
| Art. 86 AWOL | 1 | 8% | 4% |
Bad-Conduct Discharges in 8 Enlisted Convictions
For enlisted members, a punitive discharge is a bad-conduct discharge or a dishonorable discharge. In April 2025, 80% of enlisted convictions included one, compared with 60% for the year. All 8 were bad-conduct discharges, and none was dishonorable.
The month had 1 convicted officer or warrant officer, who was not dismissed. A sentence without a punitive discharge does not rule out a later administrative separation.
Short Confinement Terms
Of the 13 cases, 11 ended in a conviction on at least one charge, and 10 of those sentences included confinement (91%). The median confinement was 3 months, shorter than the 6 months across the Air Force in 2025. A quarter of the confinement terms were 6 months or longer.
The figures are adjudged sentences, set at trial before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal, and each covers every charge in its case.
Mostly Guilty Pleas and Judge-Alone Trials
The plea is recorded in 10 of the 13 cases: 7 guilty pleas and 3 contested cases. A contested case is one in which the accused pleaded not guilty to at least one charge. The contested share was 30%, lower than the 41% for the year.
A military judge alone decided 10 cases. Enlisted panels decided 2 and an officer panel decided 1. Members heard 23% of the cases, about the same as the 26% for the year.
April 2025 Compared With April 2024
April 2024 had 21 cases, and April 2025 had 13. The contested share went from 42% to 30%. Full acquittals in contested cases that reached a verdict were 4 of 8 in April 2024 and 2 of 3 in April 2025.
The median confinement went from 2 months to 3 months, and convictions with confinement went from 65% to 91%. Punitive discharges for convicted enlisted members went from 47% to 80%. With groups this small, a few cases can move each figure, so the changes show direction more than size.
| April 2024 | April 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
| Cases | 21 | 13 |
| Contested (of pleas recorded) | 42% | 30% |
| Full acquittals (decided contested) | 4 of 8 | 2 of 3 |
| Convictions with confinement | 65% | 91% |
| Median confinement | 2 months | 3 months |
| Punitive discharge (enlisted) | 47% | 80% |
| General courts-martial | 43% | 38% |
Rank and Court Level
The accused were 8 junior enlisted members (E-1 to E-4), 4 NCOs (E-5 to E-9), and 1 officer or warrant officer. That mix is similar to the Air Force across 2025, where 60% of the accused were junior enlisted.
General courts-martial made up 38% of the month's cases (5 of 13), and special courts-martial made up the rest. A general court-martial can impose long confinement and a dishonorable discharge. A special court-martial caps confinement at one year and cannot impose a dishonorable discharge.
Rule Changes and Record Limits
Since December 28, 2023, special trial counsel, not 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 within new sentencing parameters. The records give trial dates, not offense dates, so April 2025 trials may include cases under either set of rules.
Cases handled by nonjudicial punishment, administrative separation, or no action are not in these records. The records also do not describe the evidence or the plea terms, and Air Force records never report plea agreements.
Dates and sources for the law changes mentioned here: UCMJ change timeline.
How We Counted
Air Force courts-martial with a trial date in April 2025 (13 cases), compared with the whole year.
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
- Air Force Courts-Martial: Data and Trends (hub)
- By Year (hub)
- March 2025 at Air Force Courts-Martial: 19 Cases (previous / next)
- What the Air Force Tried in May 2025 (previous / next)
- How 2025 Went at Air Force Courts-Martial (the whole year)
- Air Force Courts-Martial, April 2018: The Month in Review
- Air Force Courts-Martial, April 2019: The Month in Review
- Air Force Courts-Martial, August 2018: The Month in Review
- Air Force Courts-Martial, August 2020: The Month in Review
- 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.