November 2020 at Air Force Courts-Martial: 25 Cases
The Air Force tried 25 courts-martial in November 2020, and 64% were contested, compared with 48% for the Air Force in all of 2020. Rape and sexual assault charges under Article 120 appeared in 31% of cases with a charge list, compared with 7% for the year.
Understanding Trends in Military Practice · 5 min read
Trends › By Year › November 2020
Short answer: The Air Force tried 25 courts-martial in November 2020, and 64% were contested, compared with 48% for the Air Force in all of 2020. Rape and sexual assault charges under Article 120 appeared in 31% of cases with a charge list, compared with 7% for the year.
Most Cases Were Contested
A case is contested when the accused pleads not guilty to at least one charge. This month, 16 cases were contested and 9 accused pleaded guilty. The contested share of 64% was higher than the 48% across the Air Force in 2020.
Of 15 contested cases that reached a verdict, 7 ended in a full acquittal (47%), lower than the 58% service-wide. Another 5 (33%) were partial acquittals: not guilty of at least one charge or specification and guilty of another. Air Force results give one verdict per case, so a partial acquittal appears only when an appeals opinion reports it.
Sexual Assault Charges Were More Common Than for the Year
Of the 25 records, 16 list charges, and each article counts once per case. Article 120, rape and sexual assault, appeared in 5 of them (31%), compared with 7% for the Air Force over the year.
Drug charges under Article 112a appeared in 4 cases (25%), lower than the 51% service-wide. Article 134 also appeared in 4. Article 128 (assault), Article 107 (false official statements), Article 92 (failure to obey an order or regulation), and Article 120b (rape and sexual assault of a child) each appeared in 2. Article 129, burglary and unlawful entry under its post-2019 wording, appeared once.
Air Force records rarely list charges after a full acquittal, so these shares come mostly from cases with a conviction.
| UCMJ Article | Cases | Share here | Share, the Air Force for all of 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Art. 120 Rape and sexual assault | 5 | 31% | 7% |
| Art. 112a Wrongful use, possession of controlled substances | 4 | 25% | 51% |
| Art. 134 General article | 4 | 25% | 22% |
| Art. 128 Assault | 2 | 12% | 17% |
| Art. 107 False official statements | 2 | 12% | 8% |
| Art. 92 Failure to obey order or regulation | 2 | 12% | 16% |
| Art. 120b Rape and sexual assault of a child | 2 | 12% | 8% |
| Art. 129 Burglary before 2019, burglary and unlawful entry since | 1 | 6% | 2% |
Panels and Contested Cases
The accused usually decides whether a military judge alone or a panel of members determines guilt. Where the forum is listed, members decided 36% of cases: 5 officer panels and 4 enlisted panels. A military judge alone decided 16.
Among contested cases, members decided 9 of 16 (56%). A military judge alone decided the other contested cases as well as the guilty pleas.
Confinement and Its Range
Confinement was part of 88% of the 17 convictions. The median confinement was 4 months, the same as the Air Force median for 2020. A quarter of terms were 3 years or more.
Each figure is the sentence adjudged at trial for every charge in the case. Clemency, an appeal, or a plea-agreement cap can lower it afterward.
Punitive Discharges Were Less Common
Among 16 convicted enlisted members, 7 received a bad-conduct or dishonorable discharge (44%), less often than the 50% across the Air Force in 2020. Of the 7, 4 were dishonorable discharges.
The month's 1 convicted officer or warrant officer was dismissed. A member with no punitive discharge can still face administrative separation. Only a general court-martial can adjudge a dishonorable discharge. A special court-martial can adjudge a bad-conduct discharge.
Rank and Court Level
The accused included 14 junior enlisted members, 6 NCOs, and 5 officers. That group is more senior than the Air Force as a whole that year.
General courts-martial heard 16 cases and special courts-martial 9. The general court-martial share of 64% is higher than the 51% for 2020. A general court-martial can impose any lawful sentence, including a dishonorable discharge or dismissal. A special court-martial caps confinement at one year. Since 2019, a special court-martial can also be tried by a military judge alone, with a six-month cap and no punitive discharge.
Installations
Ramstein AB, Germany, tried 3 cases. McConnell AFB, Kansas, Offutt AFB, Nebraska, and RAF Lakenheath, United Kingdom, tried 2 each, and Goodfellow AFB, Texas, tried 1. These five accounted for 40% of the month's cases. Larger installations try more cases of every kind, so a high count does not by itself mean a problem.
Compared With November 2019
November 2019 had 21 cases, and November 2020 had 25. Median confinement was 4 months in both months. Convictions with confinement went from 89% to 88%. Punitive discharges for convicted enlisted members went from 69% to 44%. The general court-martial share went from 57% to 64%.
A contested share for November 2019 is not available, because records from that period rarely list guilty pleas. Small monthly groups can change with a few cases, so these comparisons show direction only.
| November 2019 | November 2020 | |
|---|---|---|
| Cases | 21 | 25 |
| Contested (of pleas recorded) | — | 64% |
| Convictions with confinement | 89% | 88% |
| Median confinement | 4 months | 4 months |
| Punitive discharge (enlisted) | 69% | 44% |
| General courts-martial | 57% | 64% |
Limits of the Record
The records give trial dates, not offense dates. They do not describe the evidence or plea terms. Nonjudicial punishment and administrative separations do not appear. Air Force records also never report plea agreements, so a sentence cap agreed before trial does not appear in these records.
Dates and sources for the law changes mentioned here: UCMJ change timeline.
How We Counted
Air Force courts-martial with a trial date in November 2020 (25 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 October 2020 (previous / next)
- Air Force Courts-Martial, December 2020: The Month in Review (previous / next)
- Air Force Courts-Martial in 2020: 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.