Army Courts-Martial With Article 112a and Article 128, 2021–2026

Trends › By Offense › Article 112a › Army, with Article 128

Based on 34 cases · 2021–2026 · Army records · data updated October 24, 2026

Sentences Over 1 Year Were More Common

Of 33 convictions, 16 brought a sentence of more than 1 year (48%). In Army Article 112a cases overall, that share was 17%. Terms of 5 years or more made up 21% of convictions here, compared with 5%. Terms of more than 1 year but under 5 years made up 27%, compared with 12%.

Short terms were less common. Terms under 6 months made up 24% of convictions, compared with 46%. Only 1 conviction had no confinement (3%), compared with 11% in the wider group.

Median Confinement of 1 Year

33 cases ended in a conviction on at least one charge. Of those, 32 sentences included confinement (97%). The median confinement was 1 year, longer than the 5-month median in the rest of the Army. A quarter of the sentences were 4 years or longer.

These are adjudged sentences, before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal. Each sentence covers every charge in the case. Article 120 (sexual assault) was charged in 10 of the 34 cases, and those charges are part of the sentences in those cases.

General Courts-Martial Made Up 74% of Cases

There were 25 general courts-martial and 9 special courts-martial. The general share was 74%, compared with 53% in all Army Article 112a cases. Only a general court-martial can adjudge more than 1 year of confinement or a dishonorable discharge. A special court-martial is capped at 1 year of confinement.

Punitive Discharges

A punitive discharge followed 94% of enlisted convictions in these cases. There were 19 bad-conduct discharges and 10 dishonorable discharges. In the Army as a whole, the rate for Article 112a cases was 81%.

2 convicted officers or warrant officers appear here, and none was dismissed. A sentence without a punitive discharge does not rule out a later administrative separation.

Contested Cases and Acquittals

Of the 34 cases, 11 were contested and 23 were guilty pleas. The contested share was 32%, compared with 14% in Army-wide Article 112a cases. A contested case is one with a not-guilty or mixed plea.

Of the 11 contested cases that reached a verdict, 1 ended in a full acquittal (9%). The full-acquittal rate in all Army Article 112a cases in 2021–2026 was 34%. Another 9 contested cases (82%) ended in a partial acquittal, meaning not guilty of at least one charge or specification but guilty of another. Army results list findings charge by charge, so partial acquittals are common in Army records.

Of the 23 guilty pleas, 21 are recorded with a plea agreement and 2 have no entry. The records do not give the agreement terms.

Who Decided Guilt

Of the cases with the forum listed, 15% went to members: 4 enlisted panels and 1 officer panel. The other 29 were decided by a military judge alone. In contested cases, members heard 5 of 11 (45%). The accused usually chooses the forum, and most judge-alone cases are guilty pleas.

Rank and Other Charges

Junior enlisted members (E-1 to E-4) made up 82% of the accused. NCOs made up 12% and officers 6%. Across Army Article 112a cases overall, junior enlisted members were 73%.

Besides Article 128 and Article 120, the most common charges were Article 92 (orders violation) in 11 cases, Article 134 (general article) in 9, and Article 90 (disobeying an officer) in 9.

Years and Installations

The cases were tried from January 2021 through August 2026. There were 13 in 2021, 9 in 2022, 5 in 2023, 3 in 2024, 2 in 2025, and 2 in 2026, a partial year.

Fort Bliss had the most cases (5). Fort Riley, Fort Carson, and Fort Bragg had 4 each, and Fort Stewart had 3. These five installations account for 59% of the 34 cases. Larger installations try more cases of every kind.

What the Records Leave Out

The records give trial dates, not offense dates. New sentencing parameters apply when every guilty finding is for an offense after December 27, 2023, so trials from 2024 on mix old-rule and new-rule cases. The records do not describe the evidence or the plea terms. Cases handled by nonjudicial punishment or administrative separation are not included.

For what the offense covers and how it is defended, see Article 112a on the law firm's website. Dates and sources for the law changes: UCMJ change timeline.

Compare: federal court. Drug Use: Federal Sentences vs. Army Courts-Martial · Drug Distribution: Federal Sentences vs. Army Courts-Martial · 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.