June 2016 at Air Force Courts-Martial: 37 Cases
Air Force records list 37 courts-martial from June 2016. Of convicted enlisted members, 67% received a punitive discharge, compared with 54% for the Air Force across 2016. All 3 convicted officers were dismissed.
Understanding Trends in Military Practice · 5 min read
Short answer: Air Force records list 37 courts-martial from June 2016. Of convicted enlisted members, 67% received a punitive discharge, compared with 54% for the Air Force across 2016. All 3 convicted officers were dismissed.
Punitive Discharges and Dismissals
Of 27 convicted enlisted members, 18 received a bad-conduct or dishonorable discharge. That 67% share was higher than the 54% for the Air Force over all of 2016. Of the 18, 5 were dishonorable discharges. Only a general court-martial can adjudge a dishonorable discharge.
The month also had 3 convicted officers or warrant officers, and all 3 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, which these records do not cover.
The General Article and Property Offenses
Charges are listed for 30 of the 37 cases, and a case with three articles appears in three rows. Article 134, the general article, appeared in 40%, compared with 27% across the Air Force. Article 107, false official statements, appeared in 20%, compared with 10%.
Article 121 (larceny) appeared in 20%, compared with 12% for the year. Article 128 (assault) also appeared in 20%, compared with 11%. Article 112a, wrongful use or possession of controlled substances, was the most common charge, in 43%, slightly lower than the 46% for 2016. Article 120 (rape and sexual assault), Article 92 (failure to obey an order or regulation), and Article 86 (AWOL) each appeared in 10%.
| UCMJ Article | Cases | Share here | Share, the Air Force for all of 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Art. 112a Wrongful use, possession of controlled substances | 13 | 43% | 46% |
| Art. 134 General article | 12 | 40% | 27% |
| Art. 128 Assault | 6 | 20% | 11% |
| Art. 107 False official statements | 6 | 20% | 10% |
| Art. 121 Larceny | 6 | 20% | 12% |
| Art. 120 Rape and sexual assault | 3 | 10% | 7% |
| Art. 92 Failure to obey order or regulation | 3 | 10% | 16% |
| Art. 86 AWOL | 3 | 10% | 5% |
Sentences for the Most Common Charges
Cases with an Article 112a conviction had a median confinement of 5 months. Cases with an Article 134 conviction had a median of 6 months.
This table counts convictions and sentences only. Air Force records list charges mainly when a case ends in a conviction, so the table cannot show how often a charge led to a guilty finding.
| Article | Cases charging it | Convicted of it | Median confinement when convicted of it |
|---|---|---|---|
| Art. 112a Wrongful use, possession of controlled substances | 13 | 13 | 5 months |
| Art. 134 General article | 12 | 12 | 6 months |
Confinement Across the Month
There were 30 convictions on at least one charge, and 27 included confinement (90%). The median confinement was 5 months, about the same as the 4-month median for the year. A quarter of the terms were 1 year or longer.
Terms under 6 months came in 16 convictions (53%), compared with 44% for the year. Terms from 6 months to 1 year came in 5. Terms longer than one year came in 6 of 30 convictions (20%), the same as the 20% for the Air Force overall. Of those, 3 were 5 years or more. Only 3 convictions included no confinement.
These are adjudged sentences, set for every charge of conviction before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal.
| Adjudged confinement | Convictions | Share here | Share, the Air Force for all of 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|
| No confinement | 3 | 10% | 15% |
| Under 6 months | 16 | 53% | 44% |
| 6 months to 1 year | 5 | 17% | 20% |
| More than 1 year, under 5 years | 3 | 10% | 13% |
| 5 years or more | 3 | 10% | 7% |
Most Cases Were General Courts-Martial
General courts-martial accounted for 20 of the 37 cases (54%), and special courts-martial made up the rest. A general court-martial can impose long confinement and a dishonorable discharge. A special court-martial is capped at one year of confinement.
The median confinement was 1 year at general courts-martial and 4 months at special courts-martial. The court level sets the maximum punishment before trial begins.
Full Acquittals
Of the 37 cases, 7 ended in a full acquittal (19%), meaning not guilty on every charge. That is about the same as the 18% for the Air Force in 2016.
Air Force records from 2016 to 2019 rarely list the plea when the accused pleaded guilty. This rate therefore counts all cases, not only contested ones. The records do not allow a rate for contested cases alone for this month.
Who Was Tried and Who Decided Guilt
Junior enlisted members (E-1 to E-4) made up 68% of the accused, NCOs 22%, and officers 11%. The junior enlisted share across the Air Force for 2016 was 65%.
A military judge alone decided 22 cases. Members decided 41% of cases with a forum listed: 6 with enlisted panels and 9 with officer panels. The accused usually chooses whether a military judge alone or members decide guilt.
Bases, Rules, and Limits of the Records
FE Warren AFB, Wyoming, Davis-Monthan AFB, Arizona, JB Elmendorf-Richardson, Alaska, and Mountain Home AFB, Idaho, each tried 3 cases. Ramstein AB, Germany, tried 2. Together these installations account for 38% of the month's cases. Larger bases try more cases of all kinds.
These trials took place before the Military Justice Act of 2016 took effect on January 1, 2019. That law brought fixed panel sizes, judge-alone special courts-martial, and written plea agreements. The records give trial dates, not offense dates. They do not include nonjudicial punishment, the evidence, or plea terms.
Dates and sources for the law changes mentioned here: UCMJ change timeline.
How We Counted
Air Force courts-martial with a trial date in June 2016 (37 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)
- Air Force Courts-Martial, May 2016: The Month in Review (previous / next)
- What the Air Force Tried in July 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.