What the Air Force Tried in July 2016
The records hold 18 Air Force courts-martial tried in July 2016. Only 1 of the 18 ended in a full acquittal (6%), compared with 18% across the Air Force in 2016. Of the 17 convictions, 13 included confinement, and the median confinement was 4 months, the same as for the year.
Understanding Trends in Military Practice · 5 min read
Short answer: The records hold 18 Air Force courts-martial tried in July 2016. Only 1 of the 18 ended in a full acquittal (6%), compared with 18% across the Air Force in 2016. Of the 17 convictions, 13 included confinement, and the median confinement was 4 months, the same as for the year.
Few Full Acquittals
1 of the 18 cases ended in a full acquittal, meaning not guilty of all charges. That is 6% of the month, compared with 18% for the Air Force in all of 2016.
Air Force records from 2016 to 2019 rarely list the plea when the accused pleaded guilty. For that reason this page measures acquittals against all cases, not against contested cases only. The other 17 cases ended with a conviction on at least one charge.
Confinement for the 17 Convictions
13 of the 17 sentences included confinement (76%). The median confinement was 4 months, the same as the 4-month median for the Air Force across 2016. A quarter of the confinement terms were 10 months or longer.
These are adjudged sentences. The figure is the sentence announced at trial for every charge of conviction, before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal.
Punitive Discharges and Dismissals
Among convicted enlisted members, 33% received a punitive discharge: 2 bad-conduct discharges and 3 dishonorable discharges. The Air Force rate for 2016 was 54%, so punitive discharges were less common in this month.
2 convicted officers or warrant officers appear in the month, and 2 were dismissed. Dismissal is the officer equivalent of a punitive discharge. A sentence without a punitive discharge does not rule out a later administrative separation.
Drug Charges Were Less Common Than the Year
17 of the 18 records list the charges. A case charged under several articles counts once under each. Article 112a (drug offenses) was the most common article, in 6 cases or 35%. Across the Air Force in 2016 the share was 46%.
Article 120b (rape and sexual assault of a child), Article 134 (general article), Article 107 (false official statements), and Article 92 (failure to obey order or regulation) each appeared in 3 cases (18%). Article 120b and Article 107 appeared more often than in the year, at 11% and 10%. Article 134 appeared less often than its 27% for the year.
Article 121 (larceny) appeared in 2 cases, and Article 120 (rape and sexual assault) and Article 133 (conduct unbecoming an officer) in 1 each. Air Force records rarely list charges in a full acquittal, so these shares mostly describe cases with a conviction.
| UCMJ Article | Cases | Share here | Share, the Air Force for all of 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Art. 112a Wrongful use, possession of controlled substances | 6 | 35% | 46% |
| Art. 120b Rape and sexual assault of a child | 3 | 18% | 11% |
| Art. 134 General article | 3 | 18% | 27% |
| Art. 107 False official statements | 3 | 18% | 10% |
| Art. 92 Failure to obey order or regulation | 3 | 18% | 16% |
| Art. 121 Larceny | 2 | 12% | 12% |
| Art. 120 Rape and sexual assault | 1 | 6% | 7% |
| Art. 133 Conduct unbecoming an officer | 1 | 6% | 3% |
Rank and Court Level
By rank, the accused were 10 junior enlisted members, 6 NCOs, and 2 officers. That group is more senior than the Air Force as a whole in 2016.
There were 7 general and 11 special courts-martial. The general share was 39%, compared with 47% across the Air Force in 2016. A general court-martial can impose any lawful sentence. A special court-martial is limited to one year of confinement and cannot impose a dishonorable discharge.
Who Heard the Cases
A military judge alone decided guilt in 10 cases. Members heard the rest: 5 cases with enlisted panels and 3 with officer panels. Members heard 44% of the month's cases, about the same as the 45% for the year.
Before the Military Justice Act of 2016
These trials took place before the Military Justice Act of 2016 took effect on January 1, 2019. That law later set fixed panel sizes, created judge-alone special courts-martial, and brought in written plea agreements. None of those changes applied to these cases.
The records give trial dates, not offense dates. They do not describe the evidence or the plea terms, and they do not include nonjudicial punishment or administrative separations. 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 July 2016 (18 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)
- June 2016 at Air Force Courts-Martial: 37 Cases (previous / next)
- What the Air Force Tried in August 2016 (previous / next)
- The Air Force Court-Martial Year, 2016 (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.