Army Cases Charging Both Article 128b and Article 92

Trends › By Offense › Article 128b › Army, with Article 92

Based on 52 cases · 2021–2026 · Army records · data updated October 24, 2026

Confinement in 96% of Convictions

Confinement was part of 96% of the 52 convictions. Only 2 convictions (4%) had no confinement, compared with 15% in all Army Article 128b cases from 2021 to 2026.

The median term was 10 months, compared with 6 months in the wider group. A quarter of the terms were 1.3 years or longer. These are adjudged sentences: they are what the court imposed, before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal, and each covers every charge in the case.

The 6-Month to 1-Year Band

Terms of 6 months to 1 year made up 35% of convictions, compared with 20% in all Army Article 128b cases. Terms under 6 months also made up 35%, compared with 42%.

14 of the 52 convictions (27%) carried more than one year, compared with 22%. Of these, terms of more than 1 year but under 5 years were 21% of convictions, compared with 18%, and terms of 5 years or more were 6%, compared with 4%.

Partial Acquittals in Contested Cases

Of the 14 contested cases here, 13 ended in a partial acquittal (93%). A partial acquittal is a finding of not guilty on at least one charge or specification and guilty on another. Army results list findings charge by charge, so partial acquittals are common in Army records.

A contested case is one with a not-guilty or mixed plea. The contested share was 27%, the same as in all Army Article 128b cases. 38 accused pleaded guilty, and 34 of those pleas are recorded with a plea agreement; 4 have no entry. The records do not show the terms of any agreement.

Results at Each Court Level

General courts-martial heard 39 of the 52 cases (75%), compared with 70% in all Army Article 128b cases. Their median confinement was 10 months, and 36% were contested.

The 13 special courts-martial had a median confinement of 4 months. None of them was contested. A special court-martial caps confinement at one year and cannot impose a dishonorable discharge; a general court-martial can impose any lawful sentence.

Discharges

Of 49 convicted enlisted members, 34 received a punitive discharge: 29 bad-conduct and 5 dishonorable. In all Army Article 128b cases, 73% of convicted enlisted members received one.

3 convicted officers or warrant officers appear here, and none was dismissed. A sentence without a punitive discharge does not rule out a later administrative separation.

Who Decided Guilt

A military judge alone decided 44 cases. Enlisted panels heard 6 and officer panels heard 2. Members heard 15% of the cases, compared with 19% in all Army Article 128b cases. Among the 14 contested cases, members heard 8 (57%).

The accused usually chooses whether a military 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.

Rank and Other Charges

By rank, 32 accused were junior enlisted members (E-1 to E-4), 17 were NCOs (E-5 to E-9), and 3 were officers or warrant officers. In all Army Article 128b cases, junior enlisted members were 56%, so this group is more junior.

Each case included at least one article besides Article 128b and Article 92. The most common were Article 128 (assault) in 13 cases, Article 109 (property damage) in 9, Article 115 (communicating threats) in 9, and Article 112a (drug) in 7.

Years and Installations

The 52 cases were tried from March 2021 through June 2026. By year: 3 in 2021, 10 in 2022, 12 in 2023, 14 in 2024, 6 in 2025, and 7 in 2026, a partial year.

Fort Bragg had 6 cases. Vilseck (Europe) and Fort Bliss had 5 each, and Joint Base Lewis-McChord and Fort Riley had 4 each. These five installations account for 46% of the cases. Larger installations try more cases of every kind.

Where the Records Stop

The records include trial dates but not offense dates. Article 128b is a covered offense, which since December 28, 2023, special trial counsel rather than commanders decide whether to prosecute. New sentencing parameters apply when every guilty finding is for an offense after December 27, 2023. Without offense dates, trials from 2024 on cannot be sorted by rule. Article 128b also applies only to offenses on or after January 1, 2019.

The evidence, the plea terms, nonjudicial punishment, and administrative separations are outside these records. Army records in this data are sparse before 2021.

For what the offense covers and how it is defended, see Article 128b on the law firm's website. Dates and sources for the law changes: UCMJ change timeline.

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.