Army Cases Charging Both Article 112a and Article 92

Trends › By Offense › Article 112a › Army, with Article 92

Based on 63 cases · 2021–2026 · Army records · data updated October 24, 2026

A Large Group, Mostly Resolved by Guilty Pleas

55 accused pleaded guilty and 8 contested at least one charge. That is 13% contested, compared with 14% in the rest of the Army. A contested case is one with a not-guilty or mixed plea.

Of the 55 guilty pleas, 52 are recorded with a plea agreement and 3 have no entry. Army records say whether there was an agreement, not what it said.

Members Heard Few Cases

A military judge alone heard 59 cases. An enlisted panel heard 3 and an officer panel heard 1. Members heard 6% of the cases, compared with 8% in Army Article 112a cases overall.

The accused usually chooses whether a military judge alone or a panel of members decides guilt. Most judge-alone cases are guilty pleas, so the split mostly follows how many cases were contested.

Sentences by Court Level

General courts-martial made up 67% of these cases (42 of 63). Special courts-martial made up the rest (21). The general courts-martial had a median confinement of 1 year. The special courts-martial had a median of 4 months. Contested shares were 14% at general courts-martial and 10% at special courts-martial.

A general court-martial can impose long confinement and a dishonorable discharge. A special court-martial caps confinement at 1 year and cannot impose a dishonorable discharge. Since 2019, a special court-martial can also be tried by a military judge alone, with confinement capped at six months and no punitive discharge.

Confinement Across All Convictions

Confinement was part of 89% of the 62 convictions. Half of those terms were 6 months or less. In Army Article 112a cases overall, the median was 5 months.

Sentences of more than 1 year came more often here: 18 of 62 convictions (29%), compared with 17%. Terms of more than 1 year but under 5 years made up 23% of convictions, compared with 12%. Terms of 6 months to 1 year made up 18%, compared with 27%. Terms under 6 months made up 42%, compared with 46%. Convictions with no confinement made up 11% in both groups.

These are adjudged sentences, before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal. Each covers every charge in the case.

Bad-Conduct and Dishonorable Discharges

50 of 58 convicted enlisted members received a punitive discharge. There were 42 bad-conduct discharges and 8 dishonorable discharges. In the rest of the Army, the punitive discharge share was 81%.

4 convicted officers or warrant officers appear in this group, and 2 were dismissed. Dismissal is the officer equivalent of a punitive discharge. A sentence without a punitive discharge does not rule out a later administrative separation, which these records do not cover.

Rank of the Accused

Junior enlisted members (E-1 to E-4) made up 70% of the accused, NCOs 24%, and officers 6%. Across Army Article 112a cases overall, junior enlisted members were 73%. The rank mix is close to the wider group.

Other Charges

Every case charged at least one article besides Article 112a, and Article 92 was charged in all 63. The next most common were Article 128 (assault) in 11 cases, Article 121 (larceny) in 10, Article 134 (general article) in 9, and Article 81 (conspiracy) in 8.

Cases by Year and Installation

The cases were tried from January 2021 through October 2026. The yearly count was 17 in 2021, 15 in 2022, 12 in 2023, 10 in 2024, 5 in 2025, and 4 in 2026, a partial year.

Fort Riley had the most cases (8). Fort Hood and Fort Bragg had 7 each, Fort Bliss had 6, and Fort Carson had 4. These five installations account for 51% of the 63 cases. Larger installations try more cases of every kind.

What the Records Do Not Cover

The records give trial dates, not offense dates. New sentencing parameters apply when every guilty finding is for an offense after December 27, 2023, and since December 28, 2023, special trial counsel decide whether to prosecute covered offenses. Trials from 2024 on mix cases under old and new rules. The records do not describe the evidence or the plea terms, and they do not include nonjudicial punishment or administrative separation.

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.

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

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.