How Army Communicating Threats Cases Ended in 2021

Trends › By Offense › Article 115 › Army, 2021

Based on 31 cases · 2021 · Army records · data updated October 24, 2026

Every Case Included Another Charge

Every one of the 31 cases charged at least one other article alongside Article 115. Article 128 (assault) was the most common other charge, in 21 cases. Article 120 (sexual assault) and Article 134 (general article) each appeared in 8, Article 90 (disobeying an officer) in 6, and Article 91 (insubordination) in 5.

This affects every sentence figure below. An adjudged sentence covers all the findings in a case. The sentence in a threats case often includes an assault or sexual assault conviction as well.

Few Full Acquittals

Of the 11 contested cases that reached a verdict, 2 ended in a full acquittal, meaning not guilty on every charge. That is an 18% rate, compared with 35% for all Army cases in 2021. Another 7 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. A partial acquittal still means a conviction and a sentence on the charges that were proved.

How Often Cases Were Contested

A plea is listed in 30 of 31 records. Of those, 19 accused pleaded guilty and 11 contested at least one charge, a 37% contested share, about the same as the 36% for all Army cases in 2021.

Plea agreements are recorded for 17 of the 19 guilty pleas, and 2 have no entry. Army records state whether there was an agreement but not its terms.

Confinement in Most Convictions

Confinement was part of 93% of the 29 convictions. The median term was 7 months, longer than the 6 months for all Army cases in 2021. A quarter of the terms were 1.3 years or longer.

Middle and long terms were more common than across the Army. Terms of 6 months to 1 year were given in 10 convictions (34%), compared with 17% Army-wide. Terms over one year were given in 9 of 29 convictions (31%), compared with 26%. Only 2 convictions (7%) included no confinement, compared with 19% across the Army.

These are adjudged sentences, as announced at trial and before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal.

More Punitive Discharges Than the Army Rate

A punitive discharge, meaning a bad-conduct or dishonorable discharge, was adjudged in 21 of 26 enlisted convictions: 17 bad-conduct and 4 dishonorable. That is 81%, compared with 70% Army-wide.

For officers, the equivalent outcome is a dismissal. Of 3 convicted officers or warrant officers, 1 was dismissed. A sentence that omits a punitive discharge does not rule out an administrative separation afterward.

Most convicted enlisted members in these cases received a punitive discharge. A dishonorable discharge, which only a general court-martial can adjudge, was given in 4 of them.

Court Level and Forum

Of the 31 cases, 23 were general courts-martial (74%), about the same as the 73% for the Army. A general court-martial can impose any lawful sentence. A special court-martial is limited to one year of confinement and cannot impose a dishonorable discharge. Only a general court-martial can adjudge the terms over one year seen here.

The accused usually chooses whether a military judge alone or a panel of members decides guilt. A judge alone decided 24 cases. Of cases with the forum listed, 20% went to members, all 6 of them enlisted panels. Among contested cases, members heard 6 of 10 (60%).

Rank and Installations

By rank, 16 accused were junior enlisted (E-1 to E-4), 12 were NCOs (E-5 to E-9), and 3 were officers or warrant officers. The group was more senior than all Army cases in 2021, where 58% were junior enlisted.

Fort Bragg tried 7 of these cases, Joint Base Lewis-McChord 5, Fort Campbell 3, and Fort Hood and Vilseck (Europe) 2 each. Together they tried 61% of the 31. Larger installations try more cases of every kind, so the counts do not show much about a single base.

The Start of the Army Records

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, so no earlier year is available for comparison.

The records give trial dates, not offense dates. They do not describe the evidence or the plea terms, and threats handled through nonjudicial punishment or administrative separation do not appear in them.

For what the offense covers and how it is defended, see Article 115 on the law firm's website. Dates and sources for the law changes: UCMJ change timeline.

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.