Army Obstruction Cases Against Junior Enlisted (E-1 to E-4): Outcomes and Sentences

Trends › By Offense › Article 131b › Junior Enlisted (E-1 to E-4)

Based on 45 cases · 2021–2025 · Army records · data updated October 24, 2026

Longer Confinement for Junior Enlisted Members

Confinement was part of 90% of the 42 convictions. The median confinement was 1.4 years, compared with 9 months across all Army Article 131b cases. A quarter of the sentences were 3.1 years or longer.

Sentences longer than one year were 20 of 42 convictions (48%), compared with 35% for the offense overall. Sentences of more than 1 year and under 5 years were 31% of convictions, compared with 24%. Sentences of 5 years or more were 17%, compared with 11%.

These are adjudged sentences, before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal. Each covers every charge in the case. A soldier convicted of obstruction and a violent or drug offense receives one sentence for the whole case.

Other Charges in the Same Cases

Article 131b was the only charge in 0 of the 45 cases. The most common other charges were Article 128 (assault) in 13 cases, Article 134 (general article) in 11, Article 112a (drug) in 11, Article 92 (orders violation) in 10, and Article 128b (domestic violence) in 9.

The sentence covers all of those charges together. The long sentences here therefore do not measure the punishment for obstruction alone. The records do not divide a sentence among charges.

Sentences at Each Court Level

General courts-martial were 75% of the 44 cases with a court level listed (33 of 44). At general courts-martial, 97% of convictions included confinement, and the median was 2 years. At the 11 special courts-martial, 82% did, and the median was 3 months. The court level is not listed for 1 case.

A general court-martial can impose any lawful sentence, including long confinement and a dishonorable discharge. A special court-martial can impose no more than one year of confinement. It can impose a bad-conduct discharge but not a dishonorable discharge.

Punitive Discharges

For enlisted members, a punitive discharge is a bad-conduct discharge or a dishonorable discharge. Of 42 convicted enlisted members, 32 received a bad-conduct or dishonorable discharge (76%). That is higher than the 67% in all Army Article 131b cases. Of the 32, 14 were dishonorable discharges. A sentence with no punitive discharge does not rule out a later administrative separation.

Pleas and Verdicts

Contested cases were 31% of those with a plea recorded: 14 not-guilty or mixed pleas and 31 guilty pleas. Across all Army Article 131b cases, the contested share was 42%.

Plea agreements are recorded for 27 of the 31 guilty pleas, and 4 have no entry. The records do not give the terms.

Of the 14 contested cases that reached a verdict, 3 ended in a full acquittal (21%). That is lower than the 28% for the offense overall. 9 ended in a partial acquittal, meaning the accused was found not guilty of at least one charge or specification and guilty of another.

Who Decided Guilt?

Members decided 11% of cases with the forum listed. All 5 were enlisted panels. A judge alone decided the other 39. In contested cases, members decided 5 of 13 (38%). The accused usually chooses the forum, and guilty pleas are usually decided by a military judge alone. The split between judges and members therefore mostly follows the number of contested cases.

Years, Installations, and Rank

The 45 cases were tried from January 2021 to June 2025. There were 11 in 2021, 12 in 2022, 6 in 2023, 13 in 2024, and 3 in 2025.

Joint Base Lewis-McChord had 6 cases. Fort Carson and Fort Bliss had 4 each, and Fort Irwin and Fort Huachuca had 3 each. Together they account for 44% of the cases. Larger installations try more cases of every kind, so the installation counts mostly follow installation size.

Across all Army Article 131b cases, junior enlisted members were 41% of the accused. That comparison group also includes NCOs and officers.

What the Records Do Not Show

When every guilty finding is for an offense after December 27, 2023, the military judge sets the sentence within new sentencing parameters. The records list trial dates, not offense dates. Trials from 2024 on therefore include cases under both sentencing systems.

The records do not describe the conduct, the evidence, or the plea terms. They do not include matters handled by nonjudicial punishment or administrative separation. Army records are sparse before 2021.

Dates and sources for the law changes mentioned here: UCMJ change timeline.

Compare: federal court. Obstruction of Justice: 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.