Army Cases Charging Both Article 120 and Article 93

Trends › By Offense › Article 120 › Army, with Article 93

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

Fewer Punitive Discharges Than Other Article 120 Cases

Of 13 convicted enlisted members, 6 received a punitive discharge: 1 bad-conduct discharge and 5 dishonorable discharges. That is 46%. In all Army Article 120 cases from 2021 to 2025, the share was 82%.

For enlisted members, a punitive discharge means a bad-conduct or dishonorable discharge. For officers, the equivalent is a dismissal. The records list 3 convicted officers or warrant officers, and 1 was dismissed. A sentence with no punitive discharge does not rule out an administrative separation later, and these records do not cover separations.

NCOs Were Most of the Accused

NCOs made up 79% of the accused in these cases. Officers made up 12%, and junior enlisted members (E-1 to E-4) made up 8%. In all Army Article 120 cases, junior enlisted members were 57% of the accused.

Article 93 makes it a crime to be cruel toward, oppress, or maltreat a person subject to one's orders. The rank mix here is far more senior than in the wider Article 120 group, and the records list rank only, not the relationship between the people involved.

Most Cases Were Contested

A case is contested when the accused pleads not guilty to at least one charge, which includes a mixed plea. Of the 24 cases, 20 were contested and 4 were guilty pleas. The contested share was 83%, higher than the 71% for all Army Article 120 cases.

Of the 20 contested cases that reached a verdict, 8 ended in a full acquittal, meaning not guilty of all charges. That rate, 40%, is lower than the 45% in all Army Article 120 cases. Another 11 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 appear often in Army records.

Confinement After Conviction

The cases produced 16 convictions, and 10 of them included confinement. The median confinement was 11 months. For all Army Article 120 cases in the same years, the median was 1.8 years. A quarter of the confinement terms here were 2.7 years or longer.

These are adjudged sentences, the terms announced at trial. They come before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal. Each sentence also covers every charge in the case, so it is not a sentence for Article 120 or Article 93 alone.

Who Decided Guilt

A military judge alone decided guilt in 13 of the 24 cases (54%). Members heard the other 11: 8 enlisted panels and 3 officer panels. Among the 20 contested cases, members heard 11 (55%).

In most cases the accused chooses whether a military judge alone or a panel of members decides guilt. Every case heard by members here was a contested case.

Court Level and Other Charges

General courts-martial heard 19 of the 24 cases (79%), and special courts-martial heard the rest. A general court-martial can impose any lawful sentence, including long confinement and a dishonorable discharge or dismissal. A special court-martial caps confinement at one year and can impose a bad-conduct discharge but not a dishonorable discharge.

Article 93 was charged in all 24 cases, by definition of this group. Article 128 (assault) appeared in 11, Article 92 (orders violation) in 10, Article 134 (general article) in 8, and Article 107 (false official statement) in 5. A case counts under each other article it included, so these counts overlap.

Years and Installations

The cases were tried from February 2021 through October 2025. There were 8 in 2021, 9 in 2022, 3 in 2023, 3 in 2024, and 1 in 2025.

Fort Campbell had the most cases, with 4. Joint Base Lewis-McChord, Camp Humphreys, Fort Knox, and Fort Drum had 3 each. These five installations account for 67% of the 24 cases. Larger installations try more cases of all kinds, so a high count does not by itself point to a problem at a base.

Rule Changes and What the Records Leave Out

Article 120 is a covered offense. Since December 28, 2023, special trial counsel, not commanders, decide whether to prosecute covered offenses. When every guilty finding in a case is for an offense after December 27, 2023, the military judge sets the sentence under new sentencing parameters. Both rules depend on the offense date, so trials from 2024 on include cases under old and new rules.

The records give trial dates but not offense dates. They do not describe the evidence or the terms of any plea agreement. Conduct handled by nonjudicial punishment or administrative separation does not appear. 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.