Fighting an Army Property Damage Charge: How Contested Cases Ended
From 2021–2025, the Army records hold 12 contested courts-martial with an Article 109 (property damage) charge. Only 2 of 12 ended in a full acquittal (17%), compared with 38% across all contested Army cases in those years.
Understanding Trends in Military Practice · 4 min read
Trends › By Offense › Article 109 › Fighting a Army Property Damage Charge:
Short answer: From 2021–2025, the Army records hold 12 contested courts-martial with an Article 109 (property damage) charge. Only 2 of 12 ended in a full acquittal (17%), compared with 38% across all contested Army cases in those years. A punitive discharge followed 40% of enlisted convictions, compared with 64% across all contested Army cases.
Few Full Acquittals, Many Split Verdicts
A case is contested when the accused pleads not guilty to at least one charge, and all 12 cases here were contested. Of the 12, 2 ended with the accused acquitted of all charges. The other 10 split the charges: not guilty of at least one charge or specification, guilty of another.
The 17% full-acquittal rate was lower than the 38% across all contested Army cases from 2021 through 2025. For each charge the Army records a separate finding, so a case with even 1 not-guilty finding among several guilty findings counts as a partial acquittal.
Domestic Violence Charges in Most Cases
Every case charged at least one article besides Article 109. Article 128b (domestic violence) appeared in 9 cases and Article 128 (assault) in 6. Article 115 (communicating threats) appeared in 4, and Article 120 (sexual assault) and Article 129 (burglary and unlawful entry) in 3 each.
Sentences After Conviction
Of the 10 convictions, 6 included confinement. The median confinement was 9 months, shorter than the 1.5 years across all contested Army cases in those years. These are adjudged sentences, before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal, and they cover every charge in the case, not only the property-damage charge.
A punitive discharge followed 40% of enlisted convictions: 3 bad-conduct discharges and 1 dishonorable discharge. The figure for all contested Army cases was 64%. A sentence without a punitive discharge does not rule out a later administrative separation.
Who Decided Guilt
The forum is listed for 11 cases. A military judge alone decided guilt in 4 (36%), and members heard 7 (64%), all of them enlisted panels. The accused usually chooses between a military judge alone and a panel of members.
NCOs and General Courts-Martial
The accused were 4 junior enlisted members (E-1 to E-4) and 8 NCOs (E-5 to E-9), with 0 officers. Across all contested Army cases in those years, 44% of the accused were junior enlisted, so this group was more senior.
There were 9 general and 3 special courts-martial. The general share, 75%, compares with 85% across all contested Army cases.
Timing and Law Changes
The 12 trials ran from March 2021 to May 2025: 3 in 2021, 3 in 2022, 2 in 2023, 3 in 2024, and 1 in 2025. Army records in this data are sparse before 2021, after the services were required to begin publishing trial records under Article 140a by December 2020.
Domestic violence, charged in most of these cases, is a covered offense. Since December 28, 2023, special trial counsel rather than commanders decide whether covered offenses are prosecuted, and for offenses after December 27, 2023, the military judge sentences within new parameters when all guilty findings fall after that date. The trial records do not give offense dates, so the 4 trials from 2024 and 2025 may mix old-rule and new-rule cases.
What the Records Do Not Show
The records show the charges, pleas, findings, and sentence. They do not show the evidence, the plea terms, or conduct handled outside a court-martial.
Dates and sources for the law changes mentioned here: UCMJ change timeline.
How We Counted
Army courts-martial tried 2021–2025: where the accused contested a charge under Article 109 (property damage) (12 cases), compared with all contested Army cases in those years.
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
- Article 109 (Property Other Than Military; Waste, Spoilage, Destruction): Court-Martial Data and Trends (hub)
- By Offense (hub)
- How Has Article 109 Changed in Army Courts-Martial Since 2021?
- What Sentence Follows an Army Property Damage Conviction?
- When Army Accused Plead Guilty to Property Damage
- Fighting an Army Child Endangerment Charge: How Contested Cases Ended
- Fighting an Army Communicating Threats Charge: How Contested Cases Ended
- Fighting an Army Domestic Violence Charge: How Contested Cases Ended
- Fighting an Army General Article Charge: How Contested Cases Ended
- 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.