Pleading Guilty to Article 131b in the Army: What Sentences Followed?
From 2021–2025, 64 Army courts-martial ended with the accused pleading guilty to charges that included Article 131b (obstruction). The median confinement was 6 months, compared with 5 months for all Army guilty pleas.
Understanding Trends in Military Practice · 5 min read
Trends › By Offense › Article 131b › Pleading Guilty to Article 131b in the A
Short answer: From 2021–2025, 64 Army courts-martial ended with the accused pleading guilty to charges that included Article 131b (obstruction). The median confinement was 6 months, compared with 5 months for all Army guilty pleas. A punitive discharge followed 72% of enlisted convictions, compared with 75% for all Army guilty pleas.
Other Charges in Every Case
This post covers guilty pleas only. In each case, the accused pleaded guilty to charges that included Article 131b, the article for obstruction of justice.
Article 131b was the only charge in 0 of the 64 cases. The most common other charges were Article 134 (general article) in 20 cases, Article 92 (orders violation) in 16, Article 128 (assault) in 15, Article 112a (drug) in 14, and Article 107 (false official statement) in 11.
A sentence covers every charge in a case. The figures below therefore describe the whole case, not the obstruction charge alone.
Confinement Compared With Other Guilty Pleas
Confinement was part of 94% of the 64 convictions. The median confinement was 6 months, compared with 5 months across Army guilty pleas. A quarter of the sentences were 1.8 years or longer.
These are adjudged sentences, before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal. The comparison group is other Army guilty pleas, not contested cases. These numbers do not show the results of contested obstruction cases.
Sentences longer than one year were more common than in Army guilty pleas overall: 19 of 64 convictions (30%), compared with 24%. Only 6% of these convictions had no confinement, compared with 14% across all guilty pleas. Sentences of 5 years or more were 11%, compared with 6%.
| Adjudged confinement | Convictions | Share here | Share, all Army guilty pleas in those years |
|---|---|---|---|
| No confinement | 4 | 6% | 14% |
| Under 6 months | 26 | 41% | 44% |
| 6 months to 1 year | 15 | 23% | 18% |
| More than 1 year, under 5 years | 12 | 19% | 17% |
| 5 years or more | 7 | 11% | 6% |
General and Special Courts-Martial
There were 41 general courts-martial and 22 special courts-martial. The court level is not listed for 1 case. The general court-martial share of 65% was about the same as the 68% across all Army guilty pleas.
The median confinement at general courts-martial was 1 year. At special courts-martial it was 3 months. 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.
Punitive Discharges and Dismissals
A punitive discharge followed 72% of enlisted convictions: 31 bad-conduct discharges and 13 dishonorable discharges. Across all Army guilty pleas, the share was 75%, slightly higher.
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. These records do not cover administrative separations.
Plea Agreements and Forum
Army records show whether a plea agreement existed but not its terms. Any agreed limit on confinement or discharge is therefore not shown here.
A military judge alone decided all 64 cases. No members panel decided any of them. Members decided 0% of all Army guilty pleas as well. The accused usually chooses the forum, and guilty pleas are usually decided by a judge alone.
Rank of the Accused
By rank, the accused were 31 junior enlisted members, 30 NCOs, and 3 officers. That group is more senior than all Army guilty pleas in the same years. The number of NCOs was close to the number of junior enlisted members.
Years and Installations
The cases were tried from January 2021 through November 2025. There were 15 in 2021, 14 in 2022, 8 in 2023, 17 in 2024, and 10 in 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.
Fort Bliss had the most cases, with 6. Joint Base Lewis-McChord had 5. Fort Hood, Fort Wainwright, and Fort Carson had 4 each. Together these five installations account for 36% of the total, so most cases were tried at other installations. Larger installations try more cases of every kind, so a count alone does not show a problem 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. When every guilty finding in a case is for an offense after December 27, 2023, the military judge sets the sentence within new sentencing parameters. Both rules depend on offense dates, which the records do not give. Trials from 2024 on therefore include cases under the old rules and the new rules.
The records do not show the evidence or the plea terms. They do not include conduct handled through nonjudicial punishment or administrative separation.
Dates and sources for the law changes mentioned here: UCMJ change timeline.
How We Counted
Army courts-martial tried 2021–2025: where the accused pleaded guilty to charges including Article 131b (obstruction) (64 cases), compared with all Army guilty pleas in those years.
Source: public court-martial records (Article 140a, UCMJ) in Military Trial Results, data updated October 24, 2026. Definitions, sources, and known gaps: how this data was built. Errors: content@bodiesburied.com.
Related Analysis
- Article 131b (Obstruction, Numbered Since 2019): Court-Martial Data and Trends (hub)
- Sentences (hub)
- How Has Article 131b Changed in Army Courts-Martial Since 2021?
- How Much Confinement for an Article 131b Conviction in the Army?
- How Often Are Contested Army Article 131b Cases Acquitted?
- Pleading Guilty to Article 131b in the Air Force: What Sentences Followed? (another service)
- Pleading Guilty to Article 131b in the Navy-Marine Corps: What Sentences Followed? (another service)
- Search every case in Military Trial Results (members)
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.