Army Courts-Martial With Article 113 and Article 128, 2021–2026
17 Army courts-martial from 2021–2026 charged both drunken or reckless driving under Article 113 and assault under Article 128.
Understanding Trends in Military Practice · 4 min read
Trends › By Offense › Article 113 › Army, with Article 128
Short answer: 17 Army courts-martial from 2021–2026 charged both drunken or reckless driving under Article 113 and assault under Article 128. Every case ended in a conviction with confinement, the median confinement was 8 months, and a punitive discharge followed 80% of enlisted convictions, compared with 44% across all Army Article 113 cases.
Punitive Discharges Were More Common
A punitive discharge followed 80% of enlisted convictions in this group: 11 bad-conduct discharges and 1 dishonorable discharge. In Army Article 113 cases overall, the rate was 44%.
2 convicted officers or warrant officers appear, and neither was dismissed. A sentence without a punitive discharge does not rule out a later administrative separation.
Confinement in All 17 Sentences
Of 17 convictions, 17 carried confinement. The median confinement was 8 months, longer than the 4 months for all Army Article 113 cases in 2021–2026. A quarter of the terms were 1.5 years or longer.
These are adjudged sentences, before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal. Each sentence covers every charge in the case, not only the driving and assault charges.
Most Were General Courts-Martial
14 of the 17 cases (82%) were general courts-martial, the level that can impose long confinement and a dishonorable discharge. The rest were special courts-martial, where confinement is capped at one year.
Pleas
15 accused pleaded guilty, and 2 entered a not-guilty or mixed plea. Contested cases made up 12% of those with a plea recorded, compared with 11% in Army-wide Article 113 cases.
All 15 guilty pleas are recorded with a plea agreement. Army records say whether there was an agreement, not what it said.
Who Decided Guilt
A military judge alone decided 15 cases. Enlisted panels decided 2, and no officer panel appears. Members heard 12% of these cases, compared with 7% in Army Article 113 cases overall.
Other Charges
No case charged Article 113 alone. Across Army-wide Article 113 cases, 30 of 74 did. Besides Article 128, the most common charges were Article 134, the general article, and Article 92, orders violation, in 4 cases each. Article 128b, domestic violence, and Article 90, disobeying an officer, each appeared in 3.
Rank and Trial Years
Junior enlisted members (E-1 to E-4) made up 59% of the accused, NCOs 29%, and officers 12%. Across Army-wide Article 113 cases, junior enlisted members were 51%.
Trials ran from June 2021 through August 2026: 2 in 2021, 2 in 2022, 5 in 2023, 4 in 2024, 3 in 2025, and 1 in 2026, a partial year.
Limits of This Data
The records give trial dates, not offense dates. Since December 28, 2023, special trial counsel, not commanders, decide whether to prosecute covered offenses such as domestic violence. New sentencing parameters apply when every guilty finding is for an offense after December 27, 2023. Without offense dates, the records cannot show which rules applied to the trials from 2024 on. The records also do not show the evidence, the plea terms, or conduct handled outside a court-martial.
For what the offense covers and how it is defended, see Article 113 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 2021–2026 that charged both Article 113 and Article 128 (17 cases), compared with all 74 Army Article 113 cases in those years.
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
- Article 113 (Misbehavior of a Sentinel Before 2019, Drunken or Reckless Driving Since): Court-Martial Data and Trends (hub)
- Article 128 (Assault): Court-Martial Data and Trends (hub)
- Army Courts-Martial: Data and Trends (hub)
- Army Courts-Martial With Article 113 and Article 92, 2022–2026
- Army Cases Charging Both Article 107 and Article 120
- Army Cases Charging Both Article 107 and Article 121
- Army Cases Charging Both Article 107 and Article 131b
- Army Cases Charging Both Article 107 and Article 80
- Army Cases Charging Both Article 107 and Article 81
- Army Cases Charging Both Article 108 and Article 121
- Article 113 explained on the law firm's website
- Search every case in Military Trial Results (members)
Compare: federal court. 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.