What Happens to Army Junior Enlisted (E-1 to E-4) Facing Drunken Or Reckless Driving Charges?
The Army tried 36 courts-martial from 2021 through 2025 charging junior enlisted soldiers (E-1 to E-4) with drunken or reckless driving under Article 113. The contested share was 11%, the same as for all Army Article 113 cases.
Understanding Trends in Military Practice · 5 min read
Trends › By Offense › Article 113 › Junior Enlisted (E-1 to E-4)
Short answer: The Army tried 36 courts-martial from 2021 through 2025 charging junior enlisted soldiers (E-1 to E-4) with drunken or reckless driving under Article 113. The contested share was 11%, the same as for all Army Article 113 cases. Of those convicted, 49% received a punitive discharge, compared with 43%. Confinement was part of nearly every conviction.
Confinement in Nearly Every Conviction
Of 35 convictions, 32 included confinement, and only 3 (9%) did not. Across all Army Article 113 cases, 22% of convictions included no confinement. Junior soldiers were sentenced without confinement less often.
The median term was 4 months, the same as the median across all Army Article 113 cases. A quarter of terms were 8 months or longer. Every figure is an adjudged sentence: the punishment set at trial for all charges in the case, before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal.
More Sentences Above One Year
Terms longer than one year were given in 6 of 35 convictions (17%), compared with 13% across all Army Article 113 cases. Terms of more than 1 year but under 5 years made up 14%, compared with 12%. In 1 conviction (3%), the term was 5 years or more, compared with 1%.
Most terms were short. Terms under 6 months made up 57% of convictions, compared with 51%. Terms of 6 months to 1 year made up 17%, compared with 13%.
| Adjudged confinement | Convictions | Share here | Share, all Army Article 113 cases |
|---|---|---|---|
| No confinement | 3 | 9% | 22% |
| Under 6 months | 20 | 57% | 51% |
| 6 months to 1 year | 6 | 17% | 13% |
| More than 1 year, under 5 years | 5 | 14% | 12% |
| 5 years or more | 1 | 3% | 1% |
Who Received a Punitive Discharge?
A punitive discharge was adjudged in 49% of enlisted convictions in this group, compared with 43% across all Army Article 113 cases. Courts adjudged 14 bad-conduct discharges and 3 dishonorable discharges.
A bad-conduct discharge or dishonorable discharge is part of the sentence itself. A soldier whose sentence included neither could still be separated administratively later, outside these records.
Other Charges in the Same Case
In 12 of the 36 cases, Article 113 was the only charge. The other cases included at least one more article. Article 128 (assault) appeared in 9, Article 134 (general article) in 7, Article 90 (disobeying an officer) and Article 92 (orders violation) in 5 each, and Article 114 (endangerment) in 4.
A court-martial sentence covers every charge. The confinement and discharge figures describe whole cases, including any assault or endangerment charges, not the driving offense alone. The records do not divide a sentence among its charges.
Guilty Pleas Under Agreements
Of the 36 accused, 32 pleaded guilty and 4 contested at least one charge, meaning they entered a not-guilty or mixed plea. That is an 11% contested share, the same as the 11% across all Army Article 113 cases. Every one of the 32 guilty pleas is recorded with a plea agreement. Army records show that an agreement existed, but not what it said.
A military judge alone decided 34 cases, and enlisted panels heard 2. No case went to an officer panel. Members heard 6% of cases, compared with 7% service-wide. The accused usually chooses the forum, and most judge-alone cases are guilty pleas.
General and Special Courts-Martial
General courts-martial heard 17 cases and special courts-martial 10. For 9 cases, no court level is listed, so the court-level figures are incomplete. A general court-martial can impose any lawful sentence. Since 2019, a special court-martial can also be tried by a judge alone, limited to six months with no punitive discharge.
Where the level is known, the median confinement was 6 months at general courts-martial, with 18% contested. At special courts-martial, the median was 4 months, with 10% contested. A special court-martial cannot adjudge more than one year of confinement or a dishonorable discharge.
Cases by Year and Installation
The trials took place from April 2021 to December 2025. The count was 2 in 2021 and 6 in 2022. It was 11 in 2023, 10 in 2024, and 7 in 2025. 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.
Fort Wainwright tried 9 of the cases, more than any other installation. Fort Hood tried 4, and Fort Bliss, Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, and Fort Riley tried 3 each. These five installations tried 61% of the cases. Larger installations try more cases of every kind.
All 36 accused were junior enlisted, compared with 51% across all Army Article 113 cases.
What Remains Unknown
The records do not show blood alcohol levels, whether anyone was injured, the evidence, or plea terms. They list trial dates rather than offense dates, so they cannot place cases under the sentencing rules for offenses after December 27, 2023. Driving offenses handled by nonjudicial punishment or administrative action are not included.
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 tried 2021–2025 that charged junior enlisted members (E-1 to E-4) under Article 113 (36 cases), compared with every Army Article 113 case.
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)
- Army Courts-Martial: Data and Trends (hub)
- NCOs (E-5 to E-9) Charged Under Article 113 in the Army
- Air Force Drunken Or Reckless Driving Cases Against Junior Enlisted (E-1 to E-4): Outcomes and Sentences
- What Happens to Navy-Marine Corps Junior Enlisted (E-1 to E-4) Facing Drunken Or Reckless Driving Charges?
- Is Army Drunken Or Reckless Driving Prosecution Rising or Falling? Article 113, 2021–2025
- Air Force Article 113 Cases by the Numbers, 2021–2025
- Article 113 explained on the law firm's website
- Search every case in Military Trial Results (members)
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.