What Sentence Follows an Army General Article Conviction?
The median confinement for Army convictions under Article 134, the general article, from 2021–2025 was 1 year, compared with 6 months for all Army convictions. Of 435 convictions, 187 (43%) were sentenced to more than one year, compared with 28%.
Understanding Trends in Military Practice · 5 min read
Trends › By Offense › Article 134 › What Sentence Follows a Army general art
Short answer: The median confinement for Army convictions under Article 134, the general article, from 2021–2025 was 1 year, compared with 6 months for all Army convictions. Of 435 convictions, 187 (43%) were sentenced to more than one year, compared with 28%. A punitive discharge followed 81% of enlisted convictions, compared with 73%.
Longer Sentences Than Army-Wide
Article 134 covers a wide range of conduct not spelled out elsewhere in the code, so its cases vary a great deal. As a group, these convictions had longer confinement than Army convictions overall.
Of the 435 convictions, 391 included confinement (90%). The median confinement was 1 year. A quarter of the sentences were 2.3 years or longer.
Sentences of more than 1 year and under 5 years were 141 convictions (32%), compared with 20% across Army convictions. 46 (11%) were 5 years or more, compared with 8%. Short sentences were less common: 115 convictions (26%) were under 6 months, compared with 39%. 44 (10%) had no confinement, compared with 17%.
| Adjudged confinement | Convictions | Share here | Share, all Army convictions in those years |
|---|---|---|---|
| No confinement | 44 | 10% | 17% |
| Under 6 months | 115 | 26% | 39% |
| 6 months to 1 year | 89 | 20% | 16% |
| More than 1 year, under 5 years | 141 | 32% | 20% |
| 5 years or more | 46 | 11% | 8% |
Other Charges in the Same Cases
Article 134 was the only charge in 168 of the 435 cases. In the other cases, Article 128 (assault) was the most common other charge, in 87 cases. Next were Article 92 (orders violation) in 60, Article 120b (child sexual abuse) in 46, Article 120 (sexual assault) in 38, and Article 80 (attempt) in 35.
Each adjudged sentence covers every charge in the case and was set before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal. The records do not divide a sentence among charges. The long sentences here therefore cannot be tied to the general article alone.
Most Cases Were General Courts-Martial
General courts-martial were 84% of the 425 cases with a court level listed (359 of 425). Special courts-martial were 66, and the court level is not listed for 10.
A general court-martial can impose any lawful sentence, including long confinement and a dishonorable discharge. A special court-martial can impose no more than one year of confinement and cannot adjudge a dishonorable discharge.
At general courts-martial, the median confinement was 1.3 years, and 18% of cases were contested. At special courts-martial, the median was 3 months, and 9% were contested.
Punitive Discharges
Of 403 convicted enlisted members, 326 received a bad-conduct or dishonorable discharge (81%). That is higher than the 73% across Army convictions. Of those, 124 were dishonorable discharges.
There were 31 convicted officers or warrant officers, and 19 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.
Most Cases Were Guilty Pleas
There were 364 guilty pleas and 71 contested cases. In a contested case, the accused pleads not guilty to at least one charge. The contested share of 16% was lower than the 21% across Army convictions.
Of the 364 guilty pleas, 349 are recorded with a plea agreement and 15 have no entry. Army records show whether an agreement existed, not its terms.
Every case here ended in a conviction under Article 134. A contested case may still include a partial acquittal on another charge or specification. Army results list findings charge by charge, so partial acquittals are common in Army records.
Who Decided Guilt?
A military judge alone decided guilt in 402 cases. Members decided 8% of the cases with the forum listed: 26 by enlisted panels and 7 by officer panels. In contested cases, members decided 33 of 71 (46%). The accused usually chooses the forum, and most judge-alone cases are guilty pleas.
Rank and Cases per Year
By rank, 239 accused were junior enlisted members (E-1 to E-4), 164 were NCOs (E-5 to E-9), and 31 were officers or warrant officers. That mix is similar to Army convictions overall, where 57% were junior enlisted.
There were 86 cases in 2021, 81 in 2022, 86 in 2023, 91 in 2024, and 91 in 2025. The yearly numbers were about the same across the period. Army records in this data are sparse before 2021.
Installations
Joint Base Lewis-McChord had the most cases, with 45. Next were Fort Bragg (43), Fort Hood (37), Fort Campbell (25), and Fort Bliss (22). Together these installations account for 40% of the 435 cases. Larger installations try more cases of every kind.
What the Records Do Not Show
The records give trial dates, not offense dates. Since December 28, 2023, special trial counsel decide whether to prosecute covered offenses such as sexual assault. New sentencing parameters apply when every guilty finding is for an offense after December 27, 2023. Trials from 2024 on therefore include cases under the old rules and the new rules.
The records do not include the evidence, the plea terms, or matters resolved by nonjudicial punishment or administrative separation.
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.
How We Counted
Army courts-martial tried 2021–2025: ending in a conviction under Article 134 (general article) (435 cases), compared with all Army convictions 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 134 (General Article): Court-Martial Data and Trends (hub)
- Sentences (hub)
- Fewer or More? General Article Charges at Army Courts-Martial, 2021–2025
- Fighting an Army General Article Charge: How Contested Cases Ended
- Guilty Pleas in Army General Article Cases: How Often, and What Came Next
- What Sentence Follows an Air Force General Article Conviction? (another service)
- What Sentence Follows a Navy-Marine Corps General Article Conviction? (another service)
- Article 134 explained on the law firm's website
- Search every case in 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. This analysis is for education and information only. It is not legal advice, and every case is different.