> ## 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 Obstruction Cases Against NCOs (E-5 to E-9): Outcomes and Sentences - URL: https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-article-131b-ncos/ - Published: 2026-10-28T08:18:56.000Z - Updated: 2026-11-03T01:46:10.000Z - Description: NCOs (E-5 to E-9) were charged with obstruction under Article 131b in 56 Army courts-martial from 2021–2025. The median confinement after conviction was 6 months, shorter than the 9 months in all Army Article 131b cases. - 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/) › NCOs (E-5 to E-9) **Short answer:** NCOs (E-5 to E-9) were charged with obstruction under Article 131b in 56 Army courts-martial from 2021–2025\. The median confinement after conviction was 6 months, shorter than the 9 months in all Army Article 131b cases. 28 of 47 convicted NCOs received a punitive discharge, and the share for the offense overall was 67%. Based on 56 cases · 2021–2025 · Army records · data updated October 24, 2026 ## Shorter Confinement Than for the Offense Overall Of 47 convictions, 38 included confinement. The median confinement was 6 months, compared with 9 months for all Army Article 131b cases. A quarter of the sentences were 1 year or longer. Sentences longer than one year were 10 of 47 convictions (21%), compared with 35% for the offense overall. Sentences under 6 months were 40% of convictions here, compared with 32%. Sentences of 5 years or more were 4%, compared with 11%. These are adjudged sentences, before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal. Each covers every charge in the case. | Adjudged confinement | Convictions | Share here | Share, all Army Article 131b cases | | ------------------------------- | ----------- | ---------- | ---------------------------------- | | No confinement | 9 | 19% | 15% | | Under 6 months | 19 | 40% | 32% | | 6 months to 1 year | 9 | 19% | 18% | | More than 1 year, under 5 years | 8 | 17% | 24% | | 5 years or more | 2 | 4% | 11% | ## Punitive Discharges Of 47 convicted enlisted members, 28 received a punitive discharge: 20 bad-conduct discharges and 8 dishonorable discharges. Across all Army Article 131b cases, the share was 67%. For an enlisted member, a punitive discharge is a bad-conduct discharge or a dishonorable discharge. A sentence with neither does not rule out a later administrative separation. ## Guilty Pleas and Contested Cases 30 accused pleaded guilty. 26 contested at least one charge with a not-guilty or mixed plea. The contested share of 46% is slightly higher than the 42% for the offense overall. Plea agreements are recorded for 28 of the 30 guilty pleas, and 2 have no entry. The records show whether an agreement existed, not its terms. ## Full and Partial Acquittals Of 26 contested cases that reached a verdict, 9 ended in a full acquittal (35%). That is higher than the 28% across all Army Article 131b cases. Another 16 (62%) ended in a partial acquittal, meaning not guilty of at least one charge or specification but guilty of another. Army results report findings charge by charge, so partial acquittals are common. Members acquitted in full more often than military judges. Members acquitted in full in 54% of the contested cases they decided (7 of 13). A judge alone did so in 8% (1 of 12). These 25 cases are the contested cases that reached a verdict and have the forum listed. The accused usually chooses the forum, so the 2 groups of cases are different. The records cannot show whether the forum itself affected the result. ## Who Decided Guilt? Members decided 24% of cases with the forum listed: 12 by enlisted panels and 1 by an officer panel. A judge alone decided the other 42\. In contested cases, members decided 13 of 25 (52%). The accused usually chooses between a military judge alone and a panel of members. Guilty pleas are almost always decided by a judge. The share decided by members therefore mostly follows the share of contested cases. ## Other Charges in the Same Cases Only 1 of the 56 cases charged Article 131b alone. Across all Army Article 131b cases, the count was 1 of 110. The most common other charges here were Article 92 (orders violation) in 16 cases, Article 134 (general article) in 14, Article 120 (sexual assault) in 13, Article 128 (assault) in 12, and Article 107 (false official statement) in 10\. The sentence figures above cover whole cases, not the obstruction charge alone. ## General and Special Courts-Martial There were 41 general courts-martial and 14 special courts-martial. The court level is not listed for 1 case. The general court-martial share of 75% compares with 76% in all Army Article 131b cases. At general courts-martial, the median confinement was 7 months and 56% of cases were contested. At special courts-martial, the median was 3 months and 21% were contested. A special court-martial can impose no more than one year of confinement and cannot impose a dishonorable discharge. A general court-martial can impose any lawful sentence. ## Years and Installations The 56 cases were tried between January 2021 and November 2025\. There were 13 in 2021, 12 in 2022, 9 in 2023, 13 in 2024, and 9 in 2025. Fort Bliss had the most cases, with 7\. Fort Bragg had 5\. Joint Base San Antonio-Fort Sam Houston, Vilseck (Europe), and Fort Knox had 4 each. Together they account for 43% of the total. Larger installations try more cases of every kind, so these counts mostly follow installation size. NCOs were 100% of the accused in this group. Across all Army Article 131b cases, junior enlisted members were 41% of the accused. ## What the Records Do Not Show Since December 28, 2023, new sentencing parameters apply when every guilty finding is for an offense after December 27, 2023\. The records give only trial dates, so they cannot show which cases those were. The records also do not include the evidence, the plea terms, or cases resolved 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 that charged NCOs (E-5 to E-9) under Article 131b (56 cases), compared with every Army Article 131b case. 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) - [Army Courts-Martial: Data and Trends](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-courts-martial/) (hub) - [Army Obstruction Cases Against Junior Enlisted (E-1 to E-4): Outcomes and Sentences](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-article-131b-junior-enlisted/) - [What Happens to Air Force Junior Enlisted (E-1 to E-4) Facing Obstruction Charges?](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/air-force-article-131b-junior-enlisted/) - [Air Force Obstruction Cases Against NCOs (E-5 to E-9): Outcomes and Sentences](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/air-force-article-131b-ncos/) - [How Has Article 131b Changed in Army Courts-Martial Since 2021?](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-article-131b-trend-2021-2025/) - [Air Force Article 131b Cases by the Numbers, 2016–2025](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/air-force-article-131b-trend-2016-2025/) - [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.