Army Article 121 Cases by the Numbers, 2021–2025

Trends › By Offense › Article 121 › Army

Based on 162 cases · 2021–2025 · Army records · data updated October 24, 2026

More NCOs Than Junior Enlisted Members

The accused in larceny cases were more senior than in all Army cases. Of 162 accused, 83 were NCOs (E-5 to E-9), 65 were junior enlisted members (E-1 to E-4), and 14 were officers or warrant officers. Across all Army cases in those years, 55% of the accused were junior enlisted.

A smaller share of these cases were general courts-martial. There were 75 general courts-martial and 80 special courts-martial, and 7 cases did not list the level. Among cases with a court level listed, the general share was 48%, compared with 73% for all Army cases. A special court-martial caps confinement at one year and cannot impose a dishonorable discharge.

How Much Confinement?

127 of 157 convictions included confinement. The median confinement was 3 months, compared with 6 months Army-wide. A quarter of the sentences were 7 months or longer. 1 was a life sentence.

89 convictions (57%) were sentenced to under 6 months, compared with 39% Army-wide. 30 (19%) had no confinement. 16 of 157 convictions (10%) were sentenced to more than one year, compared with 28% Army-wide. Of those, 8 (5%) were more than 1 year but under 5 years, compared with 20%, and 8 (5%) were 5 years or more, compared with 8%. These are adjudged sentences, before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal, and each covers every charge in the case.

Sentences by Court Level

The median confinement was 5 months at general courts-martial and 2 months at special courts-martial. The contested share was 25% at the general level and 8% at the special level.

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 and can impose a bad-conduct discharge at most.

Other Charges in the Same Cases

Article 121 was the only charge in 36 of the 162 cases. The most common other charge was Article 107 (false official statement), in 40 cases. Article 92 (orders violation) was charged in 25, Article 134 (general article) in 24, Article 81 (conspiracy) in 23, and Article 112a (drugs) in 20. A sentence covers every charge, so the confinement figures above include these other charges.

Guilty Pleas and Plea Agreements

A case is contested when the accused pleads not guilty to at least 1 charge. Here, 25 cases were contested and 137 were guilty pleas. The contested share was 15%, compared with 30% in the rest of the Army.

Of the 137 guilty pleas, 132 are recorded with a plea agreement and 5 have no entry. Army records show whether there was an agreement, not what it said.

Contested Cases and Who Heard Them

5 of 25 contested cases that reached a verdict ended in a full acquittal (20%), compared with 38% in the Army as a whole. 14 ended in a partial acquittal, meaning not guilty of at least 1 charge or specification and guilty of another. Army results list findings charge by charge, which is why partial acquittals are common.

The accused usually chooses between a military judge alone and a panel of members. Members heard 12 of the 25 contested cases (48%). Contested cases decided by members ended in a full acquittal 33% of the time (4 of 12). Contested cases decided by a military judge alone ended in a full acquittal 8% of the time (1 of 13). Overall, a military judge alone decided 149 cases, enlisted panels 12, and an officer panel 1. Members heard 8% of cases, compared with 18% in the rest of the Army.

Discharges and Dismissals

96 of 144 convicted enlisted members received a punitive discharge: 87 bad-conduct and 9 dishonorable. Across the Army, the share was 73%. 6 of 13 convicted officers or warrant officers were dismissed. A sentence without a punitive discharge does not rule out a later administrative separation.

Year by Year

The cases were tried from January 2021 to December 2025: 41 in 2021, 38 in 2022, 25 in 2023, 32 in 2024, and 26 in 2025. That is 7% of the 2,422 Army courts-martial in those years.

The highest yearly number of convictions that included Article 121 was 39, in 2021. As a share of all Army convictions with offenses listed, larceny was 8% in 2021, 7% in 2022, 5% in 2023, 7% in 2024, and 6% in 2025. In 2021–2022 it was 8%, and in 2024–2025 it was 7%, about the same share.

The Yearly Count in a Chart

The chart shows the number of Army convictions that included Article 121 in each year: 39, 30, 22, 32, and 22 from 2021 through 2025. Shares of convictions allow a comparison across years with more or fewer cases overall.

Installations, Law Changes, and Limits

Fort Hood tried the most of these cases (19). Joint Base Lewis-McChord tried 13, Fort Campbell 11, Camp Humphreys 10, and Fort Bliss 9. Together they account for 38% of the 162 cases. Larger installations try more cases of every kind, so a high count alone does not mean a base has a problem with this offense.

Since December 28, 2023, special trial counsel, not commanders, decide whether to prosecute covered offenses such as sexual assault, domestic violence, and murder. When every guilty finding is for an offense after December 27, 2023, the military judge sets the sentence within new sentencing parameters. The records give trial dates, not offense dates, so trials from 2024 on include cases under both sets of rules. The services were required to begin publishing trial records under Article 140a by December 2020. The records do not show the evidence, the plea terms, or conduct handled outside a court-martial.

For what the offense covers and how it is defended, see Article 121 on the law firm's website. Dates and sources for the law changes: UCMJ change timeline.

Compare: federal court. Theft and Fraud: 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.