When Army Accused Plead Guilty to Sexual Assault

Trends › By Offense › Article 120 › When Army Accused Plead Guilty to Sexual

Based on 144 cases · 2021–2025 · Army records · data updated October 24, 2026

A Guilty Plea Did Not Mean a Short Sentence

This page covers Army cases where the accused pleaded guilty to charges that included Article 120. All 144 ended in a conviction, so the comparison is with other Army guilty pleas, not with contested cases.

Sentences here were longer than in Army guilty pleas generally. Confinement was part of 133 of the 144 sentences (92%). The median term was 1.3 years, longer than the 5 months median for all Army guilty pleas in those years. A quarter of these sentences were 2.5 years or longer.

These figures are adjudged sentences, the terms announced at trial before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal. Each sentence also covers every charge in the case, not only the Article 120 charge.

Sentence Lengths by Band

Terms longer than one year were more common here: 71 of 144 convictions (49%), compared with 24% in all Army guilty pleas. Terms of more than 1 year but under 5 years made up 35% of these convictions, compared with 17% across Army guilty pleas. Terms of 5 years or more made up 15%, compared with 6%.

No confinement was given in 8% of these convictions, compared with 14% overall. Terms under 6 months were given in 24%, compared with 44%. Only a general court-martial can adjudge more than one year of confinement. A special court-martial is limited to one year.

Nearly All General Courts-Martial

Of the 144 cases, 134 were general courts-martial and 10 were special courts-martial. The general share, 93%, compares with 68% in all Army guilty pleas. A general court-martial can impose any lawful sentence, including long confinement and a dishonorable discharge or dismissal. A special court-martial cannot impose a dishonorable discharge.

The median confinement was 1.3 years at general courts-martial and 5 months at special courts-martial.

Punitive Discharges

Among 138 enlisted members convicted, 114 received a bad-conduct or dishonorable discharge (83%), more often than in all Army guilty pleas in those years (75%). Of those discharges, 62 were dishonorable, the most severe form for enlisted members.

The group includes 6 convicted officers or warrant officers, and 4 were dismissed, the officer equivalent of a punitive discharge. A sentence without a punitive discharge does not rule out a later administrative separation.

Plea Agreements and the Forum

Army records show only whether a plea agreement existed, not its terms. They cannot show how often a sentence cap or dropped charges were part of an agreement.

A military judge alone decided 141 of the 144 cases with the forum listed (98%). Members heard 3, all enlisted panels. The accused usually chooses the forum, and most guilty pleas go before a judge alone.

Other Charges in the Same Case

Only 71 of the 144 cases charged Article 120 by itself. The other cases also charged other articles, most often Article 128 (assault) in 39 cases, Article 134 (the general article) in 19, Article 92 (orders violation) in 12, Article 107 (false official statement) in 10, and Article 128b (domestic violence) in 8.

Who Pleaded, When, and Where

By rank, the accused were 94 junior enlisted members, 44 NCOs, and 6 officers. This group was more junior than all Army guilty pleas in those years.

The data holds 144 cases from January 2021 to December 2025. The count was 41 in 2021, 36 in 2022, 32 in 2023, 19 in 2024, and 16 in 2025.

Joint Base Lewis-McChord (22), Fort Hood (16), Fort Campbell (14), Fort Bragg (11), and Fort Stewart (10) had the most cases. Together they had 51% of the total. Larger installations try more cases of every kind, so these counts do not single out any base.

New Rules for Sexual Assault Cases

Article 120 is a covered offense. Since December 28, 2023, special trial counsel, not commanders, decide whether covered offenses are prosecuted. When every guilty finding in a case is for an offense after December 27, 2023, the military judge sets the sentence within new sentencing parameters.

Both changes depend on when the offense happened, and the records give only trial dates. Trials from 2024 on include old-rule and new-rule cases. The lower yearly counts in 2024 and 2025 came in the same period as these changes. The records cannot show whether one caused the other.

What the Records Do Not Show

The records do not describe the evidence, the facts of the offense, or the plea terms. Allegations handled through nonjudicial punishment, administrative separation, or no action are not in this data. Offense dates are not given.

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.