March 2017 at Air Force Courts-Martial: 38 Cases
The Air Force tried 38 courts-martial in March 2017, and 11 of them ended in a full acquittal (29%), compared with 21% for the Air Force across 2017. The median confinement after conviction was 3 months, slightly lower than the 4 months for the year.
Understanding Trends in Military Practice · 6 min read
Short answer: The Air Force tried 38 courts-martial in March 2017, and 11 of them ended in a full acquittal (29%), compared with 21% for the Air Force across 2017. The median confinement after conviction was 3 months, slightly lower than the 4 months for the year. Of convicted enlisted members, 48% received a punitive discharge.
More Full Acquittals Than the Year
Of the 38 cases tried this month, 11 ended with the accused acquitted of all charges. That 29% share is higher than the 21% across the Air Force in 2017.
This figure is measured against all cases, not only contested ones. Air Force records from 2016 to 2019 rarely list the plea when the accused pleaded guilty, so the number of contested cases cannot be counted reliably for this period.
A full acquittal means not guilty on every charge. The share covers all of the month's cases, and a few cases more or less would change it by a noticeable amount.
Drug Charges Were the Most Common
Charges are listed for 27 of the 38 cases, and a case naming several articles counts under each. Article 112a, wrongful use or possession of controlled substances, appeared in 14 of them (52%), the same as its share for the full year.
Article 134, the general article, appeared in 5 cases (19%). Article 92, failure to obey an order or regulation, also appeared in 5 cases (19%). Assault under Article 128 appeared in 3 cases (11%). Rape and sexual assault under Article 120 also appeared in 3 cases (11%), higher than the 7% for 2017.
Article 80 (attempts) and Article 86 (AWOL) each appeared in 2 cases, and Article 93, cruelty and maltreatment, in 1. Air Force records rarely list charges for full acquittals, so these shares mostly describe cases that ended in a conviction.
| UCMJ Article | Cases | Share here | Share, the Air Force for all of 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Art. 112a Wrongful use, possession of controlled substances | 14 | 52% | 52% |
| Art. 134 General article | 5 | 19% | 21% |
| Art. 92 Failure to obey order or regulation | 5 | 19% | 17% |
| Art. 128 Assault | 3 | 11% | 11% |
| Art. 120 Rape and sexual assault | 3 | 11% | 7% |
| Art. 80 Attempts | 2 | 7% | 1% |
| Art. 86 AWOL | 2 | 7% | 3% |
| Art. 93 Cruelty and maltreatment | 1 | 4% | 0% |
Most Terms Were Under 6 Months
Confinement was part of 81% of the 27 convictions. The median confinement was 3 months, slightly lower than the 4 months for the Air Force over the year. A quarter of the terms were 1 year or longer.
Terms under 6 months came in 14 convictions (52%), compared with 46% across the Air Force. Terms longer than one year came in 3 of 27 (11%), compared with 23% for 2017. No conviction this month included 5 years or more.
These sentences are as adjudged at trial for all charges in a case. Clemency, an appeal, or a plea-agreement cap can lower them later.
| Adjudged confinement | Convictions | Share here | Share, the Air Force for all of 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|
| No confinement | 5 | 19% | 21% |
| Under 6 months | 14 | 52% | 46% |
| 6 months to 1 year | 5 | 19% | 11% |
| More than 1 year, under 5 years | 3 | 11% | 14% |
| 5 years or more | 0 | 0% | 8% |
Most Cases Were Special Courts-Martial
There were 23 special courts-martial and 15 general courts-martial. A special court-martial can impose no more than one year of confinement and cannot adjudge a dishonorable discharge. A general court-martial can impose any lawful sentence.
The median confinement was 1 year at general courts-martial and 2 months at special courts-martial. The general share was 39%, compared with 45% for the Air Force in 2017.
Punitive Discharges for Enlisted Members
Of 25 convicted enlisted members, 12 received a punitive discharge (48%): 9 bad-conduct discharges and 3 dishonorable discharges. The rate for the Air Force across 2017 was 51%.
Of 2 convicted officers or warrant officers, 1 was dismissed. A sentence without a punitive discharge does not rule out a later administrative separation, which is not in these records.
Officer Panels Were Common
The accused usually chooses whether a military judge alone or a panel of members decides guilt. Where the forum is listed, members heard 41% of cases: 12 with officer panels and 3 with enlisted panels. A military judge alone decided the other 22.
Guilty pleas are rarely listed for this period. The records therefore cannot show how the choice of forum compared with the number of contested cases.
Rank and Location
The accused were 23 junior enlisted members, 12 NCOs, and 3 officers. That mix was similar to the Air Force as a whole that year.
Holloman AFB, New Mexico, tried 5 cases, the most of any installation. JB Andrews, Maryland, and Ramstein AB, Germany, tried 3 each. Travis AFB, California, and JB Elmendorf-Richardson, Alaska, tried 2 each. Together those installations account for 39% of the month's cases. Larger installations try more cases overall, so a high count does not show a problem at a particular base.
Before the 2019 Changes
All of these trials took place before the Military Justice Act of 2016 took effect on January 1, 2019. That law set fixed panel sizes, created judge-alone special courts-martial capped at six months with no punitive discharge, and introduced written plea agreements. Cases from March 2017 were tried under the earlier rules.
What the Records Do Not Show
The records give trial dates but not offense dates. They do not show the evidence, the plea terms, or cases resolved through nonjudicial punishment or administrative separation. Records from this period rarely note a guilty plea.
Dates and sources for the law changes mentioned here: UCMJ change timeline.
How We Counted
Air Force courts-martial with a trial date in March 2017 (38 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)
- What the Air Force Tried in February 2017 (previous / next)
- What the Air Force Tried in April 2017 (previous / next)
- Air Force Courts-Martial in 2017: Year in Review (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.