Article 120 With Article 120b in the Army: What the Records Show

Trends › By Offense › Article 120 › Army, with Article 120b

Based on 26 cases · 2021–2026 · Army records · data updated October 24, 2026

Confinement Measured in Years

Confinement was part of 95% of the 22 convictions. Half of those terms were 7 years or less, and half were longer. In the Army as a whole, the Article 120 median was 1.8 years. A quarter of the sentences in this group were 13.8 years or longer.

These are adjudged sentences, before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal. Each covers every charge in the case, and every case here charged both Article 120 and Article 120b.

Most Convictions Brought 5 Years or More

Terms of 5 years or more made up 59% of convictions, compared with 19% in all Army Article 120 cases in 2021–2026. Sentences of more than 1 year came in 16 of 22 convictions (73%), compared with 56%.

Shorter terms were uncommon. Terms of more than 1 year but under 5 years made up 14%, compared with 38%. Terms of 6 months to 1 year made up 18%, compared with 14%. Terms under 6 months and convictions with no confinement were each 5% of convictions here.

Only a general court-martial can adjudge more than one year of confinement or a dishonorable discharge. A special court-martial is capped at one year.

Contested Verdicts

Guilty pleas: 7. Contested: 19. The contested share was 73%, compared with 71% in Army-wide Article 120 cases. A case is contested when the accused pleads not guilty to at least one charge.

Of 19 contested cases that reached a verdict, 4 ended in a full acquittal (21%). The full-acquittal rate in Army Article 120 cases overall was 45%. The other 15 contested cases (79%) 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 records.

Panels of Members Heard Most Contested Cases

A military judge alone decided guilt in 12 of 26 cases with the forum listed (46%). Members heard 14: 10 enlisted panels and 4 officer panels. In contested cases, members heard 14 of 19 (74%).

The accused usually chooses whether a judge alone or a panel of members decides guilt. Most judge-alone cases are guilty pleas, so the split mostly follows how many cases were contested.

Dishonorable Discharges Outnumbered Bad-Conduct Discharges

14 of 17 convicted enlisted members received a punitive discharge. Of those, 11 were dishonorable discharges and 3 were bad-conduct discharges. In the rest of the Army, the punitive discharge share for Article 120 cases was 82%.

5 convicted officers or warrant officers appear in this group, and 4 were dismissed. Dismissal is the officer form of a punitive discharge. A sentence without one does not rule out a later administrative separation.

Rank of the Accused

By rank, 12 of the accused were junior enlisted members, 8 were NCOs, and 6 were officers. The group is more senior than in the rest of the Army's Article 120 cases.

Other Charges

Article 120 was never the only charge. Besides Article 120b, the most common charges were Article 128 (assault) in 13 of the 26 cases, Article 134 (general article) in 6, Article 128b (domestic violence) in 5, and Article 92 (orders violation) in 3. A sentence covers all charges together.

Years and Installations

The cases were tried from January 2021 through July 2026. There were 9 in 2021, 5 in 2022, 4 in 2023, 5 in 2024, 2 in 2025, and 1 in 2026, a partial year.

Fort Bragg had 4 cases. Wheeler Army Airfield, Fort Hood, Fort Bliss, and Fort Drum had 3 each. These five installations account for 62% of the 26 cases. Larger installations try more cases of every kind, so a count alone says little about any one base.

Rules and Record Limits

Article 120 is a covered offense. Since December 28, 2023, special trial counsel, not commanders, decide whether to prosecute covered offenses. New sentencing parameters apply when every guilty finding is for an offense after December 27, 2023. The records give trial dates, not offense dates, so trials from 2024 on mix old-rule and new-rule cases.

The records do not describe the evidence or the plea terms. Cases handled by nonjudicial punishment or administrative separation are not included.

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.

For what the offense covers and how it is defended, see Article 120 on the law firm's website. Dates and sources for the law changes: UCMJ change timeline.

Compare: federal court. Sexual Abuse of an Adult: Federal Sentences vs. Army Courts-Martial · Child Sexual Abuse and Enticement: 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.