> ## 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.

# Army Courts-Martial With Article 131b and Article 134, 2021–2026
- URL: https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-article-131b-and-article-134-charged-together/
- Published: 2026-10-30T05:27:41.000Z
- Updated: 2026-11-03T01:46:00.000Z
- Description: The Army tried 31 courts-martial from 2021 to 2026 that charged obstruction of justice under Article 131b along with the general article, Article 134. The median confinement was 6 months, close to the 7 months for all Army Article 131b cases.
- Author: Jocelyn C. Stewart
- Tags: Understanding Trends, Article 131b, Article 134, 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/) › Army, with Article 134

**Short answer:** The Army tried 31 courts-martial from 2021 to 2026 that charged obstruction of justice under Article 131b along with the general article, Article 134\. The median confinement was 6 months, close to the 7 months for all Army Article 131b cases. Sentences of more than one year came less often: 29% of convictions, compared with 35%.

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

## Obstruction Is Rarely Charged Alone

None of these 31 cases charged Article 131b by itself. Across the Army, only 3 of 128 Article 131b cases had no other charge, so obstruction almost always comes with other charges.

Besides Article 134, the most common other charges here were Article 128 (assault) in 11 cases, Article 90 (disobeying an officer) in 7, Article 107 (false official statement) in 6, and Article 120 (sexual assault) in 6\. A single sentence covers all of them, so the records cannot show how much of a term relates to obstruction.

## Sentence Lengths

Of 28 convictions, 25 carried confinement. The median term was 6 months. For all Army Article 131b cases from 2021 to 2026, the median was 7 months. A quarter of the terms here were 1.5 years or longer.

8 of the 28 convictions (29%) carried more than one year, compared with 35% in the wider group. Terms of 5 years or more were less common: 1 conviction (4%), compared with 12%. Terms of more than 1 year but under 5 years made up 25%, compared with 23%.

The band of 6 months to 1 year was larger here: 29% of convictions, compared with 15%. Terms under 6 months made up 32%, compared with 35%, and no confinement 11%, compared with 15%.

| Adjudged confinement            | Convictions | Share here | Share, all Army Article 131b cases in 2021–2026 |
| ------------------------------- | ----------- | ---------- | ----------------------------------------------- |
| No confinement                  | 3           | 11%        | 15%                                             |
| Under 6 months                  | 9           | 32%        | 35%                                             |
| 6 months to 1 year              | 8           | 29%        | 15%                                             |
| More than 1 year, under 5 years | 7           | 25%        | 23%                                             |
| 5 years or more                 | 1           | 4%         | 12%                                             |

## Adjudged Sentences

All of these figures are adjudged sentences. They are the sentences given at trial, before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal.

The cases include 21 general courts-martial and 9 special courts-martial, and 1 case has no level listed. The general share, 70%, compares with 75% for all Army Article 131b cases. Only a general court-martial can adjudge more than one year of confinement or a dishonorable discharge.

## Pleas and Agreements

21 accused pleaded guilty and 10 contested at least one charge. A contested case has a not-guilty or mixed plea. The contested share, 32%, is lower than the 41% in all Army Article 131b cases.

All 21 guilty pleas are recorded with a plea agreement. Army records show that an agreement existed but not what it said.

## Contested Verdicts

Of 10 contested cases that reached a verdict, 3 ended in a full acquittal. That 30% rate is lower than the 35% for all Army Article 131b cases. The other 7 ended in a partial acquittal, with the accused found not guilty of some charges or specifications and guilty of others. Army results list findings charge by charge.

A military judge alone decided guilt in 25 of the 31 cases (81%). Members heard 6: 5 enlisted panels and 1 officer panel. Among the 10 contested cases, members heard 6 (60%). The accused usually chooses the forum, and most judge-alone cases are guilty pleas.

## Discharges and Dismissals

A punitive discharge followed 71% of enlisted convictions: 12 bad-conduct and 5 dishonorable. For all Army Article 131b cases, the share was 66%.

4 convicted officers or warrant officers appear here, and 3 were dismissed. A sentence without a punitive discharge does not rule out a later administrative separation.

## Rank of the Accused

NCOs made up 48% of the accused, junior enlisted members (E-1 to E-4) 39%, and officers 13%. In all Army Article 131b cases, junior enlisted members were 44% of the accused.

By that measure, this group is somewhat more senior than the wider group. For enlisted members, a punitive discharge is a bad-conduct or dishonorable discharge; for officers, it is a dismissal.

## Years and Installations

The cases were tried from January 2021 through April 2026: 10 in 2021, 5 in 2022, 4 in 2023, 6 in 2024, 4 in 2025, and 2 in 2026, a partial year.

Fort Bliss and Joint Base Lewis-McChord had 4 cases each. Fort Hood had 3, and Fort Knox and Kaiserslautern (Europe) had 2 each. These five account for 48% of the 31 cases. Larger installations try more cases of every kind.

## Gaps in What the Records Show

Only trial dates appear in these records. Since December 28, 2023, special trial counsel, not commanders, decide whether to prosecute covered offenses, and new sentencing parameters apply when every guilty finding is for an offense after December 27, 2023\. Without offense dates, trials from 2024 on mix cases under the old and new rules.

The records do not describe the evidence or the plea terms. Cases handled by nonjudicial punishment or administrative separation are not here, and Army records in this data are sparse before 2021.

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 with trial dates in 2021–2026 that charged both Article 131b and Article 134 (31 cases), compared with all 128 Army Article 131b 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)
- [Article 134 (General Article): Court-Martial Data and Trends](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/article-134-courts-martial/) (hub)
- [Army Courts-Martial: Data and Trends](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-courts-martial/) (hub)
- [Army Cases Charging Both Article 131b and Article 92](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-article-131b-and-article-92-charged-together/)
- [Article 131b With Article 92 in the Navy and Marine Corps: What the Records Show](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/navy-marine-corps-article-131b-and-article-92-charged-together/)
- [Navy-Marine Corps Cases Charging Both Article 131b and Article 134](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/navy-marine-corps-article-131b-and-article-134-charged-together/)
- [Army Cases Charging Both Article 107 and Article 120](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-article-107-and-article-120-charged-together/)
- [Army Cases Charging Both Article 107 and Article 121](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-article-107-and-article-121-charged-together/)
- [Army Cases Charging Both Article 107 and Article 131b](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-article-107-and-article-131b-charged-together/)
- [Army Cases Charging Both Article 107 and Article 80](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-article-107-and-article-80-charged-together/)
- [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.