Army Courts-Martial With Article 109 and Article 128, 2021–2026

Trends › By Offense › Article 109 › Army, with Article 128

Based on 22 cases · 2021–2026 · Army records · data updated October 24, 2026

Confinement Was Longer When Assault Was Also Charged

20 of the 22 cases ended in a conviction on at least one charge. Of those 20 sentences, 17 included confinement (85%). The median confinement was 1.3 years. Across Army Article 109 cases overall, the median was 6 months.

A quarter of the sentences with confinement were 2 years or longer. These figures are adjudged sentences, as announced at trial, before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal. Each sentence covers every charge in the case.

Share of Convictions by Sentence Length

Sentences of more than 1 year were given in 9 of 20 convictions (45%). Across Army Article 109 cases, the share was 30%. Terms of more than 1 year but under 5 years made up 35% of convictions here, compared with 23%. Terms of 5 years or more made up 10%, compared with 6%.

Shorter terms were less common. Terms under 6 months made up 20% of convictions, compared with 43% in the wider group. Terms of 6 months to 1 year made up 20%, compared with 15%. Convictions with no confinement made up 15%, compared with 13%.

Most Cases Went to a General Court-Martial

Of the cases with a court level listed, 19 were general courts-martial and 2 were special courts-martial. 1 case had no level listed. The general share was 90%, compared with 65% in all Army Article 109 cases in 2021–2026.

A general court-martial can impose any lawful sentence, including long confinement and a dishonorable discharge. A special court-martial is capped at 1 year of confinement and cannot impose a dishonorable discharge. Only a general court-martial can adjudge more than 1 year of confinement.

Since 2019, a special court-martial can also be tried by a military judge alone. In that form, confinement is capped at six months and no punitive discharge can be imposed.

Bad-Conduct and Dishonorable Discharges

A punitive discharge followed 80% of enlisted convictions in these cases. There were 12 bad-conduct discharges and 4 dishonorable discharges. In the Army as a whole, the rate for Article 109 cases was 68%.

A sentence without a punitive discharge does not rule out a later administrative separation. Administrative separations are not in these records.

Pleas and Plea Agreements

Of the 22 cases, 16 were guilty pleas and 6 were contested. A case is contested when the accused pleads not guilty to at least one charge. The contested share was 27%, compared with 24% in Army Article 109 cases overall.

15 of the 16 guilty pleas are recorded with a plea agreement, and 1 has no entry. Army records say whether there was an agreement, not what it said.

Who Decided Guilt

Of the cases with the forum listed, 19% went to members. All 4 of those were enlisted panels, and there were 0 officer panels. The other 17 cases were decided by a military judge alone.

The accused usually chooses between a judge alone and a panel of members. Most judge-alone cases are guilty pleas, so the split mostly follows how many cases were contested.

Rank, Other Charges, and Installations

Of the accused, 14 were junior enlisted members (E-1 to E-4) and 8 were NCOs (E-5 to E-9). None were officers or warrant officers. The mix is similar to Army-wide Article 109 cases, where 65% were junior enlisted.

Other common charges were Article 128b (domestic violence) in 9 cases, Article 92 (orders violation) in 7, Article 134 (general article) in 5, and Article 115 (communicating threats) in 5. Fort Bragg had the most cases (4), followed by Vilseck (Europe) (3), Fort Campbell (2), Fort Lee (2), and Fort Riley (2). Together they account for 59% of the 22 cases.

Timing and Limits of the Data

The cases run from January 2021 to March 2026. There were 11 in 2021, 7 in 2022, 2 in 2023, 1 in 2024, 0 in 2025, and 1 in 2026, a partial year. Army records in this data are sparse before 2021.

Since December 28, 2023, special trial counsel decide whether to prosecute covered offenses such as domestic violence. New sentencing parameters apply when every guilty finding is for an offense after December 27, 2023. The records give trial dates, not offense dates, so they cannot show which rules applied. They also do not describe the evidence or plea terms, and they leave out nonjudicial punishment.

Dates and sources for the law changes mentioned here: UCMJ change timeline.

Compare: federal court. Aggravated Assault: Federal Sentences vs. Army Courts-Martial

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.