Army Defense Counsel in Contested Article 112a Cases: Prior Cases and Verdicts, 2023–2026
The Army records hold 11 contested courts-martial from 2023–2026 that charged Article 112a (drug). In all 11, at least one defense counsel of record is listed, and the median prior-case count of the most experienced defense counsel on each team was 8.
Understanding Trends in Military Practice · 5 min read
Trends › Counsel Experience › Article 112a, defense counsel
Short answer: The Army records hold 11 contested courts-martial from 2023–2026 that charged Article 112a (drug). In all 11, at least one defense counsel of record is listed, and the median prior-case count of the most experienced defense counsel on each team was 8. 4 of the 11 cases ended in a full acquittal (36%), compared with 40% in all contested Army cases in those years.
Full Acquittals in Contested Drug Cases
Every case on this page was contested, meaning the accused pleaded not guilty to at least one charge. 4 of the 11 ended in a full acquittal, an acquittal of all charges. That is 36%, compared with 40% across all contested Army cases in 2023–2026.
What the Experience Count Measures
Experience on this page is the number of earlier courts-martial in this data where a lawyer was counsel of record, on either side, in the Army, before the trial date. It is a count of appearances, not a measure of skill. A lawyer may also have tried cases before the records begin.
Defense teams often list more than one lawyer, and the records do not say who led. Each case is therefore placed by its most experienced defense counsel of record. Nothing here rates or ranks any lawyer.
Defense Counsel Prior Cases
The median prior-case count for the most experienced defense counsel of record was 8. In 6 cases (55%), that lawyer had 5 to 9 prior cases. In the other 5 (45%), the lawyer had 10 to 19.
No case had a most experienced defense counsel with 0 prior cases, 1 to 4, or 20 or more.
| Prior cases (most experienced defense counsel) | Cases | Share |
|---|---|---|
| No prior cases | 0 | 0% |
| 1 to 4 | 0 | 0% |
| 5 to 9 | 6 | 55% |
| 10 to 19 | 5 | 45% |
| 20 or more | 0 | 0% |
Verdicts in Each Experience Group
In the 5 to 9 group, 2 of 6 cases ended in a full acquittal and 3 of 6 in a partial acquittal. A partial acquittal means a finding of not guilty on at least one charge or specification but guilty on another. In the 10 to 19 group, 2 of 5 ended in a full acquittal and 2 of 5 in a partial acquittal.
Each group is small. The records do not show the evidence, any plea offers, or who did the work on a case, so these rows describe outcomes, not the effect of experience.
| Prior cases (most experienced defense counsel) | Contested cases | Full acquittal | Partial acquittal |
|---|---|---|---|
| 5 to 9 | 6 | 2 of 6 | 3 of 6 |
| 10 to 19 | 5 | 2 of 5 | 2 of 5 |
Team Size
8 of the 11 cases list 2 defense counsel of record. 2 cases list 1, and 1 case lists 3 or more. In each case, at least one defense counsel of record had a prior case in this data.
Defense Compared With Prosecution
All 11 cases list lawyers for both sides. When the most experienced lawyer of record on each side is compared, the defense counsel had more prior cases in 5 cases (45%) and fewer in 6 (55%).
Years and Name Coverage
The trials took place from January 2023 to April 2026: 6 in 2023, 3 in 2024, 1 in 2025, and 1 in 2026, a partial year.
Army counsel names are nearly complete in the records from 2021. This page starts 2 years later so that most lawyers have earlier cases in the data. Variant spellings of a name are merged the same way as on Learn Your Lawyer. Navy and Marine Corps records list counsel only from mid-2025, mostly by surname, so they are left out.
Rule Changes and Limits
Since December 28, 2023, special trial counsel, not commanders, decide whether to prosecute covered offenses such as sexual assault, domestic violence, and murder. If every guilty finding in a case is for an offense after December 27, 2023, the military judge sets the sentence within new sentencing parameters. The records give trial dates, not offense dates, so trials from 2024 on mix cases under both sets of rules.
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.
How We Counted
Army courts-martial with trial dates in 2023–2026 that charged Article 112a and had a not-guilty or mixed plea (11 cases). Counsel of record are as listed in the public records.
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
- Counsel Experience (hub)
- Article 112a (Wrongful Use, Possession of Controlled Substances): Court-Martial Data and Trends (hub)
- Army Trial Counsel in Contested Article 112a Cases: Prior Cases and Verdicts, 2023–2026
- Army Defense Counsel in Contested Article 107 Cases: Prior Cases and Verdicts, 2023–2026
- Army Defense Counsel in Contested Article 115 Cases: Prior Cases and Verdicts, 2023–2026
- Army Defense Counsel in Contested Article 120 Cases: Prior Cases and Verdicts, 2023–2026
- Army Defense Counsel in Contested Article 121 Cases: Prior Cases and Verdicts, 2023–2026
- Army Defense Counsel in Contested Article 128 Cases: Prior Cases and Verdicts, 2023–2026
- Army Defense Counsel in Contested Article 131b Cases: Prior Cases and Verdicts, 2023–2026
- Article 112a explained on the law firm's website
- Search every case in Military Trial Results (members)
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.