What Sentence Follows an Army Burglary and Unlawful Entry Conviction?

Trends › By Offense › Article 129 › What Sentence Follows a Army burglary an

Based on 31 cases · 2021–2025 · Army records · data updated October 24, 2026

Punitive Discharges After Conviction

This page covers Army courts-martial that ended in a conviction under Article 129, the article for burglary and unlawful entry. The punitive discharge rate is the largest difference from other Army convictions.

Of 28 convicted enlisted members, 26 received a bad-conduct or dishonorable discharge (93%). Of those, 4 were dishonorable discharges. Across all Army convictions, the share was 73%.

All 3 convicted officers or warrant officers were sentenced to dismissal, the officer equivalent of a punitive discharge. A sentence without a punitive discharge does not rule out a later administrative separation.

Most Cases Were General Courts-Martial

Of the 31 cases, 28 were general courts-martial (90%), compared with 72% of all Army convictions. A general court-martial can impose any lawful sentence, including long confinement and a dishonorable discharge or dismissal. A special court-martial can impose no more than one year of confinement and cannot impose a dishonorable discharge.

Only a general court-martial can impose the longer sentences described below.

Longer Confinement Than Army-Wide

Confinement was part of 94% of the 31 convictions. The median confinement was 9 months, compared with 6 months for all Army convictions. A quarter of the sentences were 1.5 years or longer.

Sentences longer than one year were more common: 11 of 31 convictions (35%), compared with 28% Army-wide. Sentences of 5 years or more were 19% of these convictions, compared with 8% across the Army. Only 6% had no confinement, compared with 17%.

These are adjudged sentences, set before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal. Each covers every charge in the case.

Other Charges in Every Case

Article 129 was the only charge in 0 of the 31 cases. Article 121 (larceny) and Article 128 (assault) were each charged in 11 cases. Article 80 (attempt) and Article 92 (orders violation) were each charged in 8, and Article 128b (domestic violence) in 7.

Some cases combined unlawful entry with theft. Others combined it with violence. A sentence covers every charge, so the sentence figures here describe the whole case, not the Article 129 charge alone.

Guilty Pleas and Plea Agreements

Of the 31 accused, 24 pleaded guilty and 7 contested at least one charge. A contested case is one with a not-guilty or mixed plea. The contested share was 23%, about the same as the 21% for all Army convictions.

Of the 24 guilty pleas, 23 are recorded with a plea agreement and 1 has no entry. Army records show whether an agreement existed but not its terms. They cannot show how an agreement affected a sentence.

Judge or Members

A military judge alone decided 26 of the 31 cases (84%). Members decided 5, all enlisted panels. The accused usually chooses whether a judge or a panel of members decides guilt. Most judge-alone cases are guilty pleas.

Rank of Those Convicted

By rank, 18 of those convicted were junior enlisted members, 10 were NCOs, and 3 were officers. That mix is similar to Army convictions as a whole.

An officer receives a dismissal rather than a discharge. The 93% punitive discharge rate therefore counts enlisted members only. The officer results are counted separately.

Installations and Years

Fort Campbell, Fort Wainwright, Fort Riley, and Fort Bliss had 3 cases each. Joint Base Lewis-McChord had 2. Together these 5 installations account for 45% of the 31 cases. Larger installations try more cases of every kind.

There were 6 cases in 2021, 9 in 2022, 9 in 2023, 5 in 2024, and 2 in 2025. The last case was tried in April 2025. The services were required to begin publishing trial records under Article 140a by December 2020. Army records in this data are sparse before 2021.

Rule Changes and What the Records Do Not Show

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. Both rules depend on the offense date, which the records do not give.

The records do not describe the evidence, the plea terms, or the facts of each case. They do not include cases resolved by nonjudicial punishment, administrative separation, or no action.

Dates and sources for the law changes mentioned here: 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.