Army Drug Cases Against Junior Enlisted (E-1 to E-4): Outcomes and Sentences

Trends › By Offense › Article 112a › Junior Enlisted (E-1 to E-4)

Based on 156 cases · 2021–2025 · Army records · data updated October 24, 2026

Few Contested Cases, Fewer Full Acquittals

Only 15 of the 156 accused entered a not-guilty or mixed plea. Of those 15 contested cases, 3 ended in a full acquittal, meaning not guilty on every charge. That is a rate of 20%. Across all Army Article 112a cases, the rate was 35%.

Another 10 contested cases ended in a partial acquittal: 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 data.

Most Cases Were Guilty Pleas

The other 141 accused pleaded guilty. The contested share was 10%, compared with 14% across all Army Article 112a cases. Of those 141 guilty pleas, 131 are recorded with a plea agreement and 10 have no entry. Army records state whether an agreement existed but not its terms.

The accused usually chooses whether a military judge alone or a panel of members decides the case. A military judge alone decided 148 cases, enlisted panels 6, and officer panels 2. Members heard 5% of cases, compared with 8% service-wide. Among contested cases, members heard 8 of 15 (53%).

Confinement in Most Sentences

The 156 cases resulted in 153 convictions, and confinement was part of 93% of them. Half of those terms were 5 months or less. The median across all Army Article 112a cases was also 5 months. A quarter of terms were 11 months or longer.

The band table shows terms about the same as across the service. Terms under 6 months made up 49% of convictions, compared with 47%. Terms of 6 months to 1 year were 27% in both groups. Terms longer than one year were given in 26 of 153 convictions (17%), compared with 16%. Convictions without confinement were 7%, compared with 10%.

All figures are adjudged sentences, set at trial before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal, and they cover every charge in the case.

Most Convicted Soldiers Received a Punitive Discharge

Of 153 junior enlisted soldiers convicted, 129 received a bad-conduct or dishonorable discharge (84%), about as often as across all Army Article 112a cases (82%). Of those discharges, 19 were dishonorable.

Either court level can adjudge a bad-conduct discharge. Only a general court-martial can adjudge a dishonorable discharge. A soldier sentenced without a punitive discharge can still be separated administratively, which is outside these records.

General and Special Courts-Martial

General courts-martial heard 77 of the 155 cases with a court level listed (50%), about the same as the 53% across all Army Article 112a cases. Special courts-martial heard 78. One case has no court level listed. A special court-martial is limited to one year of confinement and cannot impose a dishonorable discharge.

At general courts-martial, the median confinement was 10 months, and 16% of cases were contested. At special courts-martial, the median was 4 months, and 4% were contested.

Other Charges in Drug Cases

Article 112a was the only charge in 44 of the 156 cases. Among other charges, Article 92 (orders violation) was the most common, in 42 cases, followed by Article 128 (assault) in 27, Article 90 (disobeying an officer) in 25, Article 81 (conspiracy) in 22, and Article 134 (general article) in 21.

Cases by Year and Installation

The number of cases fell from 51 in 2021 to 47 in 2022, 27 in 2023, 24 in 2024, and 7 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. The records do not explain the decline.

Fort Bliss tried 26 of these cases, the most of any installation. Fort Huachuca and Joint Base Lewis-McChord tried 13 each, Fort Carson 12, and Fort Riley 11. Together these installations tried 48% of the cases. Larger installations try more cases of every kind.

Junior enlisted soldiers made up 73% of all Army Article 112a cases, so most Army drug prosecutions fall in these grades.

What the Records Do Not Show

The records give no drug type, test result, or quantity, and no evidence or plea terms. Because they list trial dates rather than offense dates, they cannot sort cases by the rules in force after December 28, 2023. Drug use handled by nonjudicial punishment or administrative separation does not appear here.

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.