> ## 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.

# Contested Army Article 134 Cases Decided by a Military Judge Alone
- URL: https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-article-134-contested-judge-alone-2021-2025/
- Published: 2026-10-30T05:27:10.000Z
- Updated: 2026-10-30T08:16:36.000Z
- Description: The median confinement in 67 contested Army Article 134 (general article) cases decided by a military judge alone from 2021–2025 was 1.1 years, shorter than the 1.6 years in all contested Army Article 134 cases.
- Author: Jocelyn C. Stewart
- Tags: Understanding Trends, Article 134, Army

[Trends](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/) › [By Offense](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/by-offense/) › [Article 134](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/article-134-courts-martial/) › Decided by judge-alone

**Short answer:** The median confinement in 67 contested Army Article 134 (general article) cases decided by a military judge alone from 2021–2025 was 1.1 years, shorter than the 1.6 years in all contested Army Article 134 cases. 15 of the 67 cases ended in a full acquittal (22%), close to the 24% in all contested Army Article 134 cases.

Based on 67 cases · 2021–2025 · Army records · data updated October 24, 2026

## Shorter Confinement Than the Comparison Group

52 of the 67 cases ended in a conviction on at least one charge, and 42 of those sentences carried confinement. The median confinement was 1.1 years. In all contested Army Article 134 cases, it was 1.6 years. A quarter of those sentences were 2.7 years or longer.

The figures are adjudged sentences, as announced at trial and before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal. Each sentence covers every charge in the case, not only the Article 134 charge.

## Fewer Sentences of More Than a Year

21 of 52 convictions (40%) included more than one year of confinement, less often than the 49% in all contested Army Article 134 cases. Sentences of 5 years or more made up 10%, compared with 15%, and sentences of more than 1 year and under 5 years made up 31%, compared with 34%.

The shorter bands were larger. Sentences under 6 months made up 23% of convictions, compared with 17%, and sentences of 6 months to 1 year made up 17%, compared with 14%. 10 convictions carried no confinement (19%), compared with 21%.

| Adjudged confinement            | Convictions | Share here | Share, all contested Army Article 134 cases |
| ------------------------------- | ----------- | ---------- | ------------------------------------------- |
| No confinement                  | 10          | 19%        | 21%                                         |
| Under 6 months                  | 12          | 23%        | 17%                                         |
| 6 months to 1 year              | 9           | 17%        | 14%                                         |
| More than 1 year, under 5 years | 16          | 31%        | 34%                                         |
| 5 years or more                 | 5           | 10%        | 15%                                         |

## How the Contested Cases Ended

Every case was contested. The accused pleaded not guilty to at least one charge in all 67, and none pleaded guilty. 15 of the 67 contested cases that reached a verdict ended in a full acquittal (22%), close to the 24% in all contested Army Article 134 cases.

41 cases (61%) ended in a partial acquittal: not guilty of at least one charge or specification, guilty of another. Army results list findings charge by charge, so partial acquittals are common in Army records.

## Judge-Alone Trials in Context

Members heard 49% of all contested Army Article 134 cases. The cases on this page are the ones decided by a military judge alone. The accused usually chooses which forum decides guilt.

Because the accused makes that choice, judge-alone cases and panel cases are not alike. The shorter median sentence here describes judge-alone trials. The records cannot show whether the forum had anything to do with it.

## The General Article and Its Companion Charges

Article 134 is the general article, and it was usually charged with other articles. Only 7 of the 67 cases charged it by itself. Across all contested Army Article 134 cases, 11 of 133 did.

Article 128 (assault) was the most common added charge, in 26 cases. Article 120 (sexual assault) appeared in 19, Article 92 (orders violation) in 15, and Article 93 (maltreatment) and Article 120b (child sexual abuse) in 8 each.

## Punitive Discharges and Dismissals

29 of 42 convicted enlisted members received a punitive discharge: 16 dishonorable discharges and 13 bad-conduct discharges. In all contested Army Article 134 cases, the share was 67%.

10 convicted officers or warrant officers appear here, and 4 were dismissed. Dismissal is the officer equivalent of a punitive discharge. A sentence without a punitive discharge does not rule out a later administrative separation.

## Rank and Court Level

Junior enlisted members (E-1 to E-4) made up 46% of the accused, NCOs 36%, and officers 18%. Across all contested Army Article 134 cases, junior enlisted members were 37%.

General courts-martial heard 58 of the 66 cases with a court level listed (88%), and special courts-martial heard the rest. The court level is not listed for 1 case. A special court-martial caps confinement at one year and cannot impose a dishonorable discharge.

## Years and Installations

The cases were tried between January 2021 and October 2025: 17 in each of 2021, 2022, and 2023, then 13 in 2024 and 3 in 2025\. Fort Bragg had 10 cases, Fort Hood 9, Joint Base Lewis-McChord 5, and Fort Campbell and Fort Carson 4 each. Those five account for 48% of the 67\. Larger installations try more cases of every kind.

## Rule Changes and Missing Details

Special trial counsel, not commanders, have decided since December 28, 2023 whether covered offenses such as sexual assault, domestic violence, and murder are prosecuted. New sentencing parameters apply when every guilty finding is for an offense after December 27, 2023\. These records list trial dates only, so they cannot sort 2024 and 2025 trials by which rules applied.

Nonjudicial punishment and administrative separation are outside these records. The records also do not describe the evidence or the plea terms.

For what the offense covers and how it is defended, see [Article 134 on the law firm's website](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/practice-areas/court-martial/article-134/?ref=bodiesburied.com). Dates and sources for the law changes: [UCMJ change timeline](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/ucmj-change-timeline/).

### How We Counted

Army courts-martial with trial dates in 2021–2025 that charged Article 134, had a not-guilty or mixed plea and a result posted, and record a military judge alone as deciding guilt (67 cases), compared with all 133 such contested Army Article 134 cases. The accused usually chooses the forum, so the two groups are not alike.

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 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)
- [Sentences](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/sentences/) (hub)
- [When Members (A Panel) Decided a Contested Army Article 134 Case, 2021–2025](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-article-134-contested-members-2021-2025/)
- [Army Article 107 Trials Before Members (A Panel): Verdicts and Sentences](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-article-107-contested-members-2021-2025/)
- [Army Article 107 Trials Before a Military Judge Alone: Verdicts and Sentences](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-article-107-contested-judge-alone-2021-2025/)
- [Army Article 115 Trials Before a Military Judge Alone: Verdicts and Sentences](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-article-115-contested-judge-alone-2021-2025/)
- [Army Article 119b Trials Before Members (A Panel): Verdicts and Sentences](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-article-119b-contested-members-2021-2025/)
- [Army Article 128 Trials Before a Military Judge Alone: Verdicts and Sentences](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-article-128-contested-judge-alone-2021-2025/)
- [Army Article 80 Trials Before Members (A Panel): Verdicts and Sentences](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-article-80-contested-members-2021-2025/)
- [Article 134 explained on the law firm's website](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/practice-areas/court-martial/article-134/?ref=bodiesburied.com)
- [Search every case in Military Trial Results](https://www.bodiesburied.com/military-trial-results/) (members)

**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.