Army Cases Charging Both Article 120 and Article 90

Trends › By Offense › Article 120 › Army, with Article 90

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

A More Junior Group Than Other Article 120 Cases

15 of the accused were junior enlisted members (E-1 to E-4). 7 were NCOs (E-5 to E-9), and 2 were officers or warrant officers. That mix is more junior than Army-wide Article 120 cases, where 57% were junior enlisted.

Court level: 21 general and 3 special courts-martial. The general share, 88%, is lower than the 96% in the Army as a whole. A special court-martial caps confinement at 1 year and cannot impose a dishonorable discharge.

Longer Terms Were More Common

14 of 21 convictions brought more than 1 year of confinement (67%). The rate across all Army Article 120 cases in 2021–2026 was 56%. Terms of more than 1 year but under 5 years were 43% of convictions here, against 38%. Terms of 5 years or more were 24%, against 19%.

At the short end, only 1 conviction (5%) brought a term under 6 months, against 17% across the Army. Terms of 6 months to 1 year were 14% in both groups. No confinement was given in 14% of convictions, against 12%.

The Median Sentence

21 cases ended in a conviction on at least one charge, and 18 of those sentences included confinement (86%). The median term was 1.9 years. The Army-wide median for Article 120 cases was 1.8 years. A quarter of the terms were 5 years or longer.

All of these are adjudged sentences. They reflect what was announced at trial, before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal. A sentence covers every charge in its case.

Contested Cases

5 accused pleaded guilty, and 19 pleaded not guilty to at least one charge. The contested share, 79%, compares with 71% in Army Article 120 cases overall.

Among the 19 contested cases with a verdict, 3 ended in a full acquittal (16%), meaning not guilty on every charge. The full-acquittal rate across all Army Article 120 cases in 2021–2026 was 45%. In 14 contested cases (74%), the result was a partial acquittal: not guilty of at least one charge or specification and guilty of another. Army results list findings charge by charge, which makes partial acquittals common in Army records.

Panels Decided 55% of Cases

Of the cases with the forum listed, 55% went to members: 11 enlisted panels and 1 officer panel. The other 10 were judge alone. In contested cases, members heard 12 of 17 (71%).

In most cases, the accused chooses whether a panel or a judge alone decides guilt. Most judge-alone cases are guilty pleas.

Discharges

Among 19 enlisted members convicted, 16 received a bad-conduct or dishonorable discharge (84%). That is about the same as the Army as a whole (82%). 10 of the 16 were dishonorable discharges.

2 convicted officers or warrant officers appear in these records, and 1 was dismissed. A sentence that carries no punitive discharge does not rule out an administrative separation later.

Other Charges in the Same Cases

Article 128 (assault) was charged in 11 of the 24 cases. Article 128b (domestic violence) appeared in 7, Article 134 (general article) in 6, and Article 115 (communicating threats) in 5. A case counts under every article it charged, and its sentence covers all of them.

Years and Installations

Cases were tried from January 2021 through June 2026: 9 in 2021, 3 in 2022, 6 in 2023, 2 in 2024, 2 in 2025, and 2 in 2026, a partial year.

Wheeler Army Airfield, Joint Base Lewis-McChord, and Fort Bragg had 4 cases each. Fort Irwin and Fort Sill had 2 each. These five installations account for 67% of the 24 cases. Larger installations try more cases of every kind.

Rules and Record Gaps

Article 120 is a covered offense, and special trial counsel, not commanders, have decided whether to prosecute covered offenses since December 28, 2023. The records list trial dates, not offense dates, so they cannot show which cases came under that rule or under the sentencing parameters for offenses after December 27, 2023.

Evidence, plea terms, nonjudicial punishment, and administrative separations are all outside these records. 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

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.