> ## 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.

# When Members (A Panel) Decided a Contested Army Article 134 Case, 2021–2025
- URL: https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-article-134-contested-members-2021-2025/
- Published: 2026-10-30T05:27:11.000Z
- Updated: 2026-10-30T08:16:37.000Z
- Description: Members decided 64 contested Army cases charging Article 134 (the general article) from 2021–2025. 15 of the 64 ended in a full acquittal (23%), close to the 24% 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 members

**Short answer:** Members decided 64 contested Army cases charging Article 134 (the general article) from 2021–2025\. 15 of the 64 ended in a full acquittal (23%), close to the 24% in all contested Army Article 134 cases. Among the 49 convictions, the median confinement was 2.3 years, longer than the 1.6 years in all contested Army Article 134 cases.

Based on 64 cases · 2021–2025 · Army records · data updated October 24, 2026

## Sexual Assault and Assault Were the Common Partners

60 of the 64 cases charged at least one article besides Article 134\. Article 120 (sexual assault) appeared in 33 cases and Article 128 (assault) in 31\. Article 128b (domestic violence) appeared in 14, Article 92 (orders violation) in 13, and Article 90 (disobeying an officer) in 10.

Each court-martial sentence covers all the charges in the case. With sexual assault charged in 33 of these cases, the sentence figures below reflect much more than the general article alone.

## Longer Sentences After a Panel Conviction

Of 49 convictions, 38 carried confinement. The median confinement was 2.3 years, compared with 1.6 years in all contested Army Article 134 cases. A quarter of those sentences were 5 years or longer.

These are adjudged sentences, before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal.

## More Sentences Over One Year

28 of 49 convictions (57%) included more than one year of confinement, more often than the 49% in all contested Army Article 134 cases. Sentences of 5 years or more made up 20%, compared with 15%. Sentences of more than 1 year and under 5 years made up 37%, compared with 34%.

The short bands were smaller. Sentences under 6 months made up 10%, compared with 17%, and sentences of 6 months to 1 year made up 10%, compared with 14%. 11 convictions carried no confinement (22%), compared with 21%.

| Adjudged confinement            | Convictions | Share here | Share, all contested Army Article 134 cases |
| ------------------------------- | ----------- | ---------- | ------------------------------------------- |
| No confinement                  | 11          | 22%        | 21%                                         |
| Under 6 months                  | 5           | 10%        | 17%                                         |
| 6 months to 1 year              | 5           | 10%        | 14%                                         |
| More than 1 year, under 5 years | 18          | 37%        | 34%                                         |
| 5 years or more                 | 10          | 20%        | 15%                                         |

## Verdicts in the Contested Cases

All 64 cases were contested, with the accused pleading not guilty to at least one charge, and none pleaded guilty. 15 of the 64 contested cases that reached a verdict ended in a full acquittal (23%). That is close to the 24% rate in all contested Army Article 134 cases.

36 cases (56%) ended in a partial acquittal, meaning not guilty of at least one charge or specification but guilty of another. Army results list findings charge by charge, which is why partial acquittals are common in Army records.

## Panel Makeup and the Forum Choice

An enlisted panel decided 52 of the cases and an officer panel decided 12\. Across all contested Army Article 134 cases, members heard 49%.

The accused usually chooses whether a military judge alone or a panel of members decides guilt. That choice means panel cases are a different group from judge-alone cases. The longer median here is a description of these trials, not evidence that panels give longer sentences.

## Discharges After a Conviction

Among 42 enlisted members convicted, 27 received a bad-conduct or dishonorable discharge (64%), about as often as in all contested Army Article 134 cases (67%). 20 of the 27 were dishonorable discharges.

7 convicted officers or warrant officers appear in these cases, and 6 were dismissed. A sentence without a punitive discharge does not rule out a later administrative separation.

## A More Senior Group, Mostly at General Courts-Martial

Among the accused with rank recorded, 37 were NCOs, 18 were junior enlisted members, and 8 were officers. The group is more senior than all contested Army Article 134 cases.

59 of the 64 cases were general courts-martial (92%), compared with 89% in all contested Army Article 134 cases. A general court-martial can impose any lawful sentence. A special court-martial caps confinement at one year and cannot impose a dishonorable discharge.

## Trial Years and Installations

The cases were tried between January 2021 and December 2025\. The yearly counts fell each year: 22 in 2021, 15 in 2022, 13 in 2023, 8 in 2024, and 6 in 2025\. Fort Bragg had 11, Joint Base Lewis-McChord 9, Wheeler Army Airfield and Fort Stewart 4 each, and Fort Hood 3\. Those five account for 48% of the 64 cases, and larger installations try more cases of every kind.

## Rules That Changed and Gaps in the Records

From December 28, 2023, special trial counsel rather than commanders decide whether covered offenses such as sexual assault, domestic violence, and murder are prosecuted. Military judges now set the sentence within new sentencing parameters when every guilty finding is for an offense after December 27, 2023\. The records give no offense dates, so the 2024 and 2025 trials cannot be sorted by which rules applied.

Cases handled by nonjudicial punishment or administrative separation do not appear here. The records also say nothing about 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 members (a panel) as deciding guilt (64 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)
- [Contested Army Article 134 Cases Decided by a Military Judge Alone](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-article-134-contested-judge-alone-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.