> ## Content Index > Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.bodiesburied.com/llms.txt > Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further. # When Army Accused Plead Guilty to Property Damage - URL: https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-article-109-plea-2021-2025/ - Published: 2026-10-28T06:33:43.000Z - Updated: 2026-10-30T08:05:09.000Z - Description: Soldiers who pleaded guilty to charges including Article 109 (property damage) from 2021 to 2025 had a median confinement of 5 months, the same as all Army guilty pleas. Of convicted enlisted members, 80% received a punitive discharge, compared with 75%. - Author: Jocelyn C. Stewart - Tags: Understanding Trends, Article 109, Army [Trends](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/) › [By Offense](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/by-offense/) › [Article 109](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/article-109-courts-martial/) › When Army Accused Plead Guilty to Proper **Short answer:** Soldiers who pleaded guilty to charges including Article 109 (property damage) from 2021 to 2025 had a median confinement of 5 months, the same as all Army guilty pleas. Of convicted enlisted members, 80% received a punitive discharge, compared with 75%. In all 30 cases, Article 109 was charged with at least one other article, most often assault or domestic violence. Based on 30 cases · 2021–2025 · Army records · data updated October 24, 2026 ## Property Damage as Part of a Larger Case This page covers only Army courts-martial in which the accused pleaded guilty to charges that included Article 109, the article on wasting, spoiling, or damaging property. In none of the 30 cases was Article 109 the only charge. Most of the other charges involved violence. Article 128 assault appeared in 15 cases and Article 128b domestic violence in 14\. Article 92 orders violations appeared in 7, Article 134, the general article, in 6, and Article 115 communicating threats in 5\. A sentence covers every charge in the case, so the figures below describe those combined cases rather than property damage on its own. ## Sentences Were Similar to Other Army Guilty Pleas Of the 30 convictions, 29 included confinement. The median confinement was 5 months, the same as the 5-month median for all Army guilty pleas in the same years. A quarter of the terms were 1.3 years or longer. Some sentence lengths were different from other Army guilty pleas. Only 3% of these convictions included no confinement, compared with 14% across Army guilty pleas. Sentences longer than one year were part of 8 of 30 convictions (27%), compared with 24%. Terms of 5 years or more were part of 1 conviction (3%), compared with 6%. These are adjudged sentences, announced at trial before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal. | Adjudged confinement | Convictions | Share here | Share, all Army guilty pleas in those years | | ------------------------------- | ----------- | ---------- | ------------------------------------------- | | No confinement | 1 | 3% | 14% | | Under 6 months | 15 | 50% | 44% | | 6 months to 1 year | 6 | 20% | 18% | | More than 1 year, under 5 years | 7 | 23% | 17% | | 5 years or more | 1 | 3% | 6% | ## Sentences at Each Court Level The records list 18 general courts-martial and 11 special courts-martial, with the level not listed for 1 case. Among the 29 cases with a court level listed, the general court-martial share of 62% is lower than the 68% across all Army guilty pleas. At general courts-martial, 100% of convictions included confinement, and the median was 11 months. At special courts-martial, 91% did, and the median was 2 months. A general court-martial can impose any lawful sentence, including long confinement and a dishonorable discharge. A special court-martial caps confinement at one year and cannot impose a dishonorable discharge. ## Most Convicted Soldiers Received a Punitive Discharge Of 30 convicted enlisted members, 24 received a punitive discharge: 20 bad-conduct discharges and 4 dishonorable discharges. That rate of 80% is higher than the 75% across Army guilty pleas. For enlisted members, a punitive discharge means a bad-conduct or dishonorable discharge. A sentence without one does not rule out a later administrative separation, which these records do not show. ## Plea Agreements and the Forum Every case in this group is a guilty plea, so none was contested. Of the 30 guilty pleas, 27 are recorded with a plea agreement and 3 have no entry. Army records show whether an agreement existed, not its terms, so the records cannot show whether an agreement capped a sentence. A military judge alone decided all 30 cases, and members decided none. The accused usually chooses whether a military judge alone or a panel decides guilt. Most guilty pleas are decided by a military judge alone. ## Junior Soldiers, No Officers By rank, the accused were 22 junior enlisted members and 8 NCOs, with 0 officers. That mix is more junior than all Army guilty pleas. ## Fewer Cases in Later Years The records show 12 cases in 2021, 10 in 2022, 4 in 2023, 2 in 2024, and 2 in 2025\. The services were required to begin publishing trial records under Article 140a by December 2020, and Army records in this data are sparse before 2021. Vilseck (Europe) had the most cases with 5, followed by Joint Base Lewis-McChord with 4 and Fort Riley, Fort Campbell, and Fort Lee with 3 each. Together these 5 installations accounted for 60% of the 30 cases. Larger installations try more cases of every kind, so a count alone does not mean a base has a particular problem. ## Rules That Changed in 2023 Since December 28, 2023, special trial counsel rather than commanders decide whether to prosecute covered offenses, including domestic violence, which appears in many of these cases. When every guilty finding is for an offense after December 27, 2023, the military judge sets the sentence within new sentencing parameters. Both rules depend on the offense date, which the records do not give. Trials from 2024 on therefore include cases under the old rules and the new rules. ## What the Records Leave Out The records list trial dates, not offense dates. They do not describe what property was damaged, its value, the evidence, or plea terms, and they do not include cases handled through nonjudicial punishment or administrative separation. Dates and sources for the law changes mentioned here: [UCMJ change timeline](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/ucmj-change-timeline/). ### How We Counted Army courts-martial tried 2021–2025: where the accused pleaded guilty to charges including Article 109 (property damage) (30 cases), compared with all Army guilty pleas in those years. Source: public court-martial records (Article 140a, UCMJ) in [Military Trial Results](https://www.bodiesburied.com/military-trial-results/), data updated October 24, 2026\. Definitions, sources, and known gaps: [how this data was built](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/how-the-military-trial-results-data-was-built/). Errors: content@bodiesburied.com. ## Related Analysis - [Article 109 (Property Other Than Military; Waste, Spoilage, Destruction): Court-Martial Data and Trends](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/article-109-courts-martial/) (hub) - [Sentences](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/sentences/) (hub) - [How Has Article 109 Changed in Army Courts-Martial Since 2021?](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-article-109-trend-2021-2025/) - [What Sentence Follows an Army Property Damage Conviction?](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-article-109-sent-2021-2025/) - [Fighting an Army Property Damage Charge: How Contested Cases Ended](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-article-109-acq-2021-2025/) - [Pleading Guilty to Article 109 in the Air Force: What Sentences Followed?](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/air-force-article-109-plea-2016-2025/) (another service) - [Guilty Pleas in Navy-Marine Corps Property Damage Cases: How Often, and What Came Next](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/navy-marine-corps-article-109-plea-2017-2025/) (another service) - [Search every case in Military Trial Results](https://www.bodiesburied.com/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](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/?ref=bodiesburied.com). This analysis is for education and information only. It is not legal advice, and every case is different.