Guilty Pleas in Army Communicating Threats Cases: How Often, and What Came Next

Trends › By Offense › Article 115 › Guilty Pleas in Army Communicating Threa

Based on 56 cases · 2021–2025 · Army records · data updated October 24, 2026

Every Case Included Another Charge

Every one of the 56 cases charged at least one other article with Article 115. The most common other charges were violent offenses: Article 128 (assault) in 26 cases and Article 128b (domestic violence) in 17.

Article 92 (orders violation) was charged in 19 cases, and Article 134 (the general article) and Article 90 (disobeying an officer) in 10 each. Each sentence covers all the charges in a case, so the figures below describe whole cases, not the threat charge alone.

Longer Confinement Than the Typical Army Plea

Confinement was part of 89% of the 56 convictions. Half of those terms were 7 months or less, compared with a 5-month median across all Army guilty pleas in those years. A quarter were 1.3 years or longer.

These are adjudged sentences, the figures announced at trial. Any cap in a plea agreement, clemency, or change on appeal would come later and is not included here.

More Terms Over One Year

In all, 15 of 56 convictions (27%) included more than one year of confinement, compared with 24% across Army guilty pleas. All of those were more than 1 year and under 5 years. None was 5 years or more, compared with 6% for the wider group.

Terms of 6 months to 1 year were also more common: 25% of convictions here, compared with 18%. Terms under 6 months made up 38%, lower than the 44% Army figure. Only 6 convictions (11%) included no confinement.

Sentences by Court Level

Of these cases, 37 went to general courts-martial and 18 to special courts-martial, with 1 not listed. Among cases with a court level listed, the general share, 67%, is about the same as the 68% across all Army guilty pleas in those years.

Sentences were different at the two levels. At general courts-martial, 95% of convictions included confinement, and the median was 11 months. At special courts-martial, 78% did, and the median was 4 months. A special court-martial cannot adjudge more than one year of confinement or a dishonorable discharge, so any sentence here longer than a year came from a general court-martial.

Punitive Discharges

Among 55 convicted enlisted members, 42 received a bad-conduct or dishonorable discharge (76%), and 2 of those were dishonorable. That rate is about the same as the 75% across all Army guilty pleas.

The single convicted officer or warrant officer was not dismissed. A sentence without a punitive discharge does not rule out a later administrative separation, which happens outside the court-martial process.

Who Faced These Charges

The accused included 38 junior enlisted members, 17 NCOs, and 1 officer. This group was more junior than all Army guilty pleas in those years.

A military judge alone decided all 56 cases, which is usual for a guilty plea. No case went to a panel of members. The accused usually chooses whether a military judge alone or a panel of members decides guilt.

Cases by Year and Installation

The trials took place from January 2021 through December 2025. The count was highest in 2021, with 19. There were 13 in 2022, 8 in 2023, 11 in 2024, and 5 in 2025.

Fort Bragg and Fort Bliss had 6 cases each, Camp Humphreys and Vilseck (Europe) 5 each, and Fort Riley 3. Those five installations had 45% of the 56 cases. Larger installations try more cases of every kind, so these counts are not a measure of how often threats occur at any post.

Prosecution and Sentencing Rules After 2023

Since December 28, 2023, special trial counsel have decided whether to prosecute covered offenses such as sexual assault, domestic violence, and murder. Domestic violence under Article 128b, charged in 17 of these cases, is in that group. When every guilty finding is for an offense after December 27, 2023, the military judge sets the sentence within new sentencing parameters.

Each rule depends on the offense date, which the records do not give. Trials from 2024 on include cases under old and new rules. The data cannot show whether either change affected these results. Army records here are sparse before 2021. The services were required to begin publishing trial records under Article 140a by December 2020.

Limits of the Trial Record

Only cases tried by court-martial appear here. Threats handled through nonjudicial punishment, administrative separation, or no action are not included, and the records do not describe the words used, the evidence, or the plea terms.

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.