Army Article 80 Trials Before a Military Judge Alone: Verdicts and Sentences
A military judge alone decided 27 contested Army cases charging Article 80 (attempt) from 2021–2025. Full acquittals came in 15% of them, lower than the 26% in all contested Army Article 80 cases.
Understanding Trends in Military Practice · 5 min read
Trends › By Offense › Article 80 › Decided by judge-alone
Short answer: A military judge alone decided 27 contested Army cases charging Article 80 (attempt) from 2021–2025. Full acquittals came in 15% of them, lower than the 26% in all contested Army Article 80 cases. After a conviction, the median confinement was 2.8 years, compared with 2.3 years in all contested Army Article 80 cases.
What an Attempt Charge Is Paired With
Article 80 makes it a crime to attempt another offense, so it is usually charged with other articles. Only 3 of the 27 cases charged Article 80 by itself. Across all contested Army Article 80 cases, 8 of 62 did.
Article 134 (the general article) was the most common added charge, in 8 cases. Article 120 (sexual assault) and Article 128 (assault) each appeared in 7, Article 120c (indecent recording and exposure) in 5, and Article 92 (orders violation) in 3. One sentence covers all the charges in a case.
Fewer Full Acquittals
All 27 cases were contested, meaning the accused pleaded not guilty to at least one charge. None pleaded guilty. Full acquittals came in 15% of the 27 contested cases that reached a verdict, lower than the 26% in all contested Army Article 80 cases.
18 cases ended in a partial acquittal, with a not-guilty finding on at least one charge or specification and a guilty finding on another. Army results list findings charge by charge, so this result is common in Army records.
Confinement After a Conviction
23 cases ended in a conviction on at least one charge. Confinement was part of 87% of those sentences. The median confinement was 2.8 years, compared with 2.3 years in all contested Army Article 80 cases. A quarter of those sentences were 4 years or longer, and 1 was a life sentence.
These are adjudged sentences, before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal.
Sentence Bands Close to the Comparison Group
15 of 23 convictions (65%) included more than one year of confinement, about the same as the 63% in all contested Army Article 80 cases. Sentences of more than 1 year and under 5 years made up 48%, compared with 46%. Sentences of 5 years or more made up 17% in both groups.
3 convictions carried no confinement (13%), compared with 17%. 4 carried under 6 months (17%), compared with 13%. Only a general court-martial can adjudge more than one year of confinement.
| Adjudged confinement | Convictions | Share here | Share, all contested Army Article 80 cases |
|---|---|---|---|
| No confinement | 3 | 13% | 17% |
| Under 6 months | 4 | 17% | 13% |
| 6 months to 1 year | 1 | 4% | 7% |
| More than 1 year, under 5 years | 11 | 48% | 46% |
| 5 years or more | 4 | 17% | 17% |
Discharges and Dismissals
Among 19 enlisted members convicted, 16 received a bad-conduct or dishonorable discharge (84%), the same share as in all contested Army Article 80 cases (84%). 11 of the 16 were dishonorable discharges.
4 convicted officers or warrant officers appear in these cases, and all 4 were dismissed. Dismissal is the officer equivalent of a punitive discharge. A sentence without one does not rule out a later administrative separation.
The Forum and Who Chose It
Members heard 53% of all contested Army Article 80 cases. The 27 cases here were the ones tried by a military judge alone. The accused usually chooses whether a military judge alone or a panel of members decides guilt.
Because the accused makes that choice, cases tried each way are not alike. The lower acquittal rate and longer median here describe what happened in these trials, not what the forum caused.
Rank and Court Level
By rank, the accused were 13 junior enlisted members, 10 NCOs, and 4 officers. The group is more junior than all contested Army Article 80 cases.
26 of the 27 cases were general courts-martial (96%), and special courts-martial made up the rest. A general court-martial can impose long confinement and a dishonorable discharge. A special court-martial caps confinement at one year.
Years and Installations
The cases were tried from February 2021 through July 2025: 9 in 2021, 7 in 2022, 5 in 2023, 2 in 2024, and 4 in 2025. Fort Carson had 4 cases, and Fort Hood, Fort Bragg, and Wheeler Army Airfield had 3 each. Fort Knox had 2. Those five installations account for 56% of the 27. Larger installations try more cases of every kind.
Rules, Dates, and Data Limits
Since December 28, 2023, special trial counsel, not commanders, decide whether covered offenses such as sexual assault, domestic violence, and murder are prosecuted. For cases where every guilty finding is for an offense after December 27, 2023, the military judge sets the sentence within new sentencing parameters. The records give only trial dates, so trials from 2024 on mix both sets of rules.
Attempts handled through nonjudicial punishment or administrative separation are not counted. With 27 cases, a few results can move these percentages.
For what the offense covers and how it is defended, see Article 80 on the law firm's website. Dates and sources for the law changes: UCMJ change timeline.
How We Counted
Army courts-martial with trial dates in 2021–2025 that charged Article 80, had a not-guilty or mixed plea and a result posted, and record a military judge alone as deciding guilt (27 cases), compared with all 62 such contested Army Article 80 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, data updated October 24, 2026. Definitions, sources, and known gaps: how this data was built. Errors: content@bodiesburied.com.
Related Analysis
- Article 80 (Attempts): Court-Martial Data and Trends (hub)
- Army Courts-Martial: Data and Trends (hub)
- Sentences (hub)
- Army Article 80 Trials Before Members (A Panel): Verdicts and Sentences
- Army Article 107 Trials Before Members (A Panel): Verdicts and Sentences
- Army Article 107 Trials Before a Military Judge Alone: Verdicts and Sentences
- Army Article 115 Trials Before a Military Judge Alone: Verdicts and Sentences
- Army Article 119b Trials Before Members (A Panel): Verdicts and Sentences
- Army Article 128 Trials Before a Military Judge Alone: Verdicts and Sentences
- Army Article 92 Trials Before Members (A Panel): Verdicts and Sentences
- Article 80 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.