> ## Content Index > Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.bodiesburied.com/llms.txt > Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further. # How Often Are Contested Army Article 131b Cases Acquitted? - URL: https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-article-131b-acq-2021-2025/ - Published: 2026-10-28T08:06:10.000Z - Updated: 2026-11-03T01:46:59.000Z - Description: From 2021–2025, 13 of 46 contested Army obstruction cases under Article 131b ended in a full acquittal (28%). That is lower than the 38% across all contested Army cases. The median confinement after conviction was 2.1 years, compared with 1.5 years Army-wide. - Author: Jocelyn C. Stewart - Tags: Understanding Trends, Article 131b, Army [Trends](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/) › [By Offense](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/by-offense/) › [Article 131b](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/article-131b-courts-martial/) › How Often Are Contested Army Article 131 **Short answer:** From 2021–2025, 13 of 46 contested Army obstruction cases under Article 131b ended in a full acquittal (28%). That is lower than the 38% across all contested Army cases. The median confinement after conviction was 2.1 years, compared with 1.5 years Army-wide. Based on 46 cases · 2021–2025 · Army records · data updated October 24, 2026 ## Other Charges in Almost Every Case Article 131b makes it a crime to obstruct justice, for example by interfering with an investigation. There were 46 contested Army courts-martial that included it between January 2021 and September 2025\. It was the only charge in 1 of the 46 cases. Article 120 (sexual assault) was the most common other charge, in 22 of these cases. Article 128 (assault) was charged in 14, Article 128b (domestic violence) in 12, Article 92 (orders violation) in 10, and Article 134 (general article) in 9. A sentence covers every charge in a case. The sentences below therefore describe whole cases, not the obstruction charge alone. ## Fewer Full Acquittals Than Army-Wide Every case here was contested, meaning the accused pleaded not guilty to at least one charge. There were 0 guilty pleas. Of the 46 cases, 13 ended in a full acquittal (28%). That is lower than the 38% across all contested Army cases. Partial acquittals were more common: 29 cases (63%). In a partial acquittal, the accused is found not guilty of at least one charge or specification but guilty of another. Army findings are recorded charge by charge, so partial acquittals are common in Army records. ## Members and Military Judges In these contested cases, members acquitted in full 43% of the time. Military judges acquitted in full 5% of the time. This comparison covers the 44 contested cases that reached a verdict and have the forum listed. Members decided 23 of the 44 (52%): 17 enlisted panels and 6 officer panels. A judge alone decided the other 21. The accused chooses the forum in most cases. Members and judges therefore decided different kinds of cases. The difference in acquittal rates does not show how either would decide the same evidence. ## Confinement After Conviction Of 33 convictions, 22 included confinement (67%). The median confinement was 2.1 years, compared with 1.5 years across contested Army cases. 11 of 33 convictions (33%) had no confinement, compared with 25% Army-wide. Another 11 (33%) were more than 1 year and under 5 years. 4 (12%) were 5 years or more. Sentences longer than one year were 15 of 33 convictions (45%), about the same as the 44% in the comparison group. Only a general court-martial can adjudge more than one year. These are adjudged sentences, before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal. | Adjudged confinement | Convictions | Share here | Share, all contested Army cases in those years | | ------------------------------- | ----------- | ---------- | ---------------------------------------------- | | No confinement | 11 | 33% | 25% | | Under 6 months | 5 | 15% | 22% | | 6 months to 1 year | 2 | 6% | 9% | | More than 1 year, under 5 years | 11 | 33% | 28% | | 5 years or more | 4 | 12% | 15% | ## Discharges and Dismissals A punitive discharge followed 57% of enlisted convictions: 7 bad-conduct discharges and 9 dishonorable discharges. That is lower than the 64% across contested Army cases. Of 5 convicted officers or warrant officers, 4 were sentenced to dismissal, the officer form of a punitive discharge. A sentence with no punitive discharge can still be followed by an administrative separation. These records do not cover administrative separations. ## Rank and Court Level The accused were 14 junior enlisted members, 26 NCOs, and 6 officers. That group is more senior than contested Army cases overall. General courts-martial tried 41 cases and special courts-martial tried 4\. The court level is not listed for 1\. The general court-martial share of 91% compares with 85% Army-wide. A general court-martial can impose any lawful sentence. A special court-martial can impose no more than one year of confinement and cannot adjudge a dishonorable discharge. ## Years and Installations There were 10 cases in 2021, 12 in 2022, 7 in 2023, 12 in 2024, and 5 in 2025\. The yearly counts do not show a steady increase or decrease. No year had more than 12 cases, so small changes mean little. Fort Bragg had the most cases, with 7\. Next were Fort Bliss with 6, Fort Benning and Joint Base Lewis-McChord with 4 each, and Fort Stewart with 3\. Together these five installations had 52% of the 46 cases. Larger installations try more cases of every kind, so a high count does not show a problem with obstruction at any one base. ## 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. For offenses after December 27, 2023, a military judge sets the sentence within new sentencing parameters. The records give trial dates, not offense dates. Trials from 2024 on therefore include cases under both sets of rules. The records do not include the evidence or plea terms. They do not include obstruction allegations handled by nonjudicial punishment or administrative separation. Dates and sources for the law changes mentioned here: [UCMJ change timeline](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/ucmj-change-timeline/). ### How We Counted Army courts-martial tried 2021–2025: where the accused contested a charge under Article 131b (obstruction) (46 cases), compared with all contested Army cases in those years. Source: public court-martial records (Article 140a, UCMJ) in [Military Trial Results](https://www.bodiesburied.com/military-trial-results/), data updated October 24, 2026\. Definitions, sources, and known gaps: [how this data was built](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/how-the-military-trial-results-data-was-built/). Errors: content@bodiesburied.com. ## Related Analysis - [Article 131b (Obstruction, Numbered Since 2019): Court-Martial Data and Trends](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/article-131b-courts-martial/) (hub) - [By Offense](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/by-offense/) (hub) - [How Has Article 131b Changed in Army Courts-Martial Since 2021?](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-article-131b-trend-2021-2025/) - [How Much Confinement for an Article 131b Conviction in the Army?](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-article-131b-sent-2021-2025/) - [Pleading Guilty to Article 131b in the Army: What Sentences Followed?](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-article-131b-plea-2021-2025/) - [Not Guilty Pleas in Navy-Marine Corps Article 131b Cases: What Happened at Trial](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/navy-marine-corps-article-131b-acq-2017-2025/) (another service) - [Fighting an Army Child Endangerment Charge: How Contested Cases Ended](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-article-119b-acq-2021-2025/) - [Fighting an Army Communicating Threats Charge: How Contested Cases Ended](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-article-115-acq-2021-2025/) - [Search every case in Military Trial Results](https://www.bodiesburied.com/military-trial-results/) (members) **Compare: federal court.** [Obstruction of Justice: Federal Sentences vs. Army Courts-Martial](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal-obstruction-vs-army/) **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](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/?ref=bodiesburied.com). This analysis is for education and information only. It is not legal advice, and every case is different.