Army Cases Charging Both Article 134 and Article 80

Trends › By Offense › Article 134 › Army, with Article 80

Based on 50 cases · 2021–2026 · Army records · data updated October 24, 2026

Most Sentences Exceeded 1 Year

35 of the 48 convictions (73%) carried more than one year of confinement. Across Army-wide Article 134 cases from 2021 to 2026, the share was 43%. Terms of more than 1 year but under 5 years made up 50% of convictions here, compared with 33%. Terms of 5 years or more made up 23%, compared with 10%.

The short bands were small. Only 2 convictions (4%) fell between 6 months and 1 year, compared with 20% Army-wide. Terms under 6 months made up 15%, compared with 25%, and no confinement 8%, compared with 12%.

Median of 2.2 Years

Confinement was part of 92% of the 48 convictions. The median term was 2.2 years, compared with 1 year in Army-wide Article 134 cases. A quarter of the terms were 5.3 years or longer.

The figures are adjudged sentences. They are the sentences announced at trial, before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal. A sentence covers all charges in the case, including the attempt and any others.

Nearly All at General Courts-Martial

General courts-martial heard 47 of the 50 cases (94%); special courts-martial heard the rest. A general court-martial can impose any lawful sentence, including long confinement and a dishonorable discharge or dismissal. A special court-martial caps confinement at one year and cannot impose a dishonorable discharge.

Only a general court-martial can adjudge more than one year of confinement. With 47 of the 50 cases at that level, the long terms in this group came from general courts-martial.

Discharges and Dismissals

A punitive discharge followed 96% of enlisted convictions: 24 dishonorable and 19 bad-conduct. Army-wide, 80% of Article 134 enlisted convictions brought one. For enlisted members, a punitive discharge is a bad-conduct or dishonorable discharge, and only a general court-martial can impose the dishonorable form.

3 convicted officers or warrant officers appear in this group, and all 3 were dismissed. A sentence without a punitive discharge does not rule out an administrative separation later.

Pleas and Contested Verdicts

35 accused pleaded guilty and 15 contested at least one charge through a not-guilty or mixed plea. The contested share, 30%, is higher than the 23% Army-wide for Article 134 cases. 31 of the 35 guilty pleas are recorded with a plea agreement, and 4 have no entry; the terms are not in the records.

Of 15 contested cases that reached a verdict, 2 ended in a full acquittal. That 13% rate is lower than the 25% Army-wide. 10 ended in a partial acquittal, with the accused found not guilty of at least one charge or specification and guilty of another. Army results list findings charge by charge.

Forum

Members heard 14% of the cases with the forum listed: 5 enlisted panels and 2 officer panels. A military judge alone decided the other 43. Among contested cases, members heard 7 of 15 (47%).

The accused usually chooses whether a military judge alone or a panel of members decides guilt. Most judge-alone cases are guilty pleas.

Rank and Companion Charges

By rank, 32 accused were junior enlisted members (E-1 to E-4), 15 were NCOs (E-5 to E-9), and 3 were officers or warrant officers. Army-wide, 54% of the accused in Article 134 cases were junior enlisted, so this group is more junior.

No case charged Article 134 alone. Army-wide, 221 of 589 Article 134 cases had no other charge. Besides Article 80, the most common were Article 128 (assault) in 9 cases, Article 120b (child sexual abuse) in 8, Article 90 (disobeying an officer) in 6, and Article 120 (sexual assault) in 5.

Years and Installations

The cases were tried from February 2021 through September 2026. There were 11 in 2021, 12 in 2022, 13 in 2023, 6 in 2024, 6 in 2025, and 2 in 2026, a partial year.

Joint Base Lewis-McChord had 9 cases and Fort Hood had 6. Fort Bragg, Fort Stewart, and Wheeler Army Airfield had 4 each. These five account for 54% of the 50 cases. Larger installations try more cases of every kind.

What Is Missing From the Records

Offense dates are not recorded, only trial dates. That leaves open which trials from 2024 on came under the special trial counsel system, in place since December 28, 2023, for covered offenses, and which came under the new sentencing parameters for offenses after December 27, 2023.

The records also do not show the evidence, the plea terms, nonjudicial punishment, or administrative separations. Army records in this data are sparse before 2021.

For what the offense covers and how it is defended, see Article 134 on the law firm's website. Dates and sources for the law changes: UCMJ change timeline.

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.