How Much Confinement for an Article 82 Conviction in the Army?

Trends › By Offense › Article 82 › How Much Confinement for an Article 82 C

Based on 29 cases · 2021–2025 · Army records · data updated October 24, 2026

Solicitation Sentences Were Long

Article 82 covers soliciting or advising another person to commit an offense. In the Army, 29 courts-martial from May 2021 to February 2025 ended in a conviction that included this charge. Their sentences were longer than most Army sentences.

Of the 29 convictions, 19 (66%) included more than one year of confinement, compared with 28% across Army convictions. Sentences of more than 1 year and under 5 years made up 13 convictions (45%), compared with 20%. Sentences of 5 years or more made up 6 (21%), compared with 8%.

Few Short Sentences

Only 3 convictions (10%) had confinement under 6 months, compared with 39% Army-wide. Another 3 (10%) had no confinement, compared with 17%. Terms of 6 months to 1 year made up 4 convictions (14%), about the same as the 16% across the Army.

Confinement was part of 26 of the 29 sentences (90%). The median confinement was 2.5 years, and a quarter of sentences were 4.5 years or longer. In a group this small, each case changes the percentages noticeably.

Charged With Child Sexual Abuse and Attempts

Of the 29 cases, 27 included at least one other article. Article 134 (general article) appeared in 15 cases, Article 120b (child sexual abuse) in 9, Article 80 (attempt) in 7, Article 112a (drug) in 4, and Article 92 (orders violation) in 2.

These are adjudged sentences, set at trial before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal. Each sentence covers every charge in the case. When a case also included a child sexual abuse charge, the sentence covers both charges, and the records do not divide it among them.

Almost Every Case at a General Court-Martial

Of the 29 cases, 28 were general courts-martial and 1 was a special court-martial. The general share was 97%, compared with 72% across Army convictions.

Court level sets the maximum sentence. A general court-martial can impose any lawful sentence, including long confinement and a dishonorable discharge. A special court-martial caps confinement at one year and cannot adjudge a dishonorable discharge.

Discharges

A punitive discharge was adjudged in 93% of enlisted convictions. There were 15 dishonorable discharges and 10 bad-conduct discharges. Across Army convictions, the punitive discharge share was 73%.

There were 2 convicted officers or warrant officers, and 1 was dismissed. Dismissal is the officer equivalent of a punitive discharge. A sentence without a punitive discharge does not rule out a later administrative separation.

Pleas and Forum

Of the 29 accused, 23 pleaded guilty and 6 contested the charges. A contested case is one where the accused pleaded not guilty to at least one charge. The contested share was 21%, the same as the 21% across Army convictions.

Of the 23 guilty pleas, 22 are recorded with a plea agreement and 1 has no entry. Army records show whether an agreement existed, not what it said. The adjudged sentences here come before any cap an agreement set.

A military judge alone decided guilt in 25 cases. Members decided the other 4: 2 enlisted panels and 2 officer panels. Members heard 14% of cases, compared with 12% across Army convictions. The accused usually chooses the forum, and most judge-alone cases are guilty pleas.

Rank, Years, and Installations

By rank, 16 accused were junior enlisted (E-1 to E-4), 11 were NCOs (E-5 to E-9), and 2 were officers or warrant officers. This mix is similar to Army convictions overall, where 57% were junior enlisted.

By trial year, there were 3 cases in 2021, 10 in 2022, 5 in 2023, 7 in 2024, and 4 in 2025. Joint Base Lewis-McChord and Fort Hood had 4 cases each. Wheeler Army Airfield and Fort Carson had 3 each, and Fort Bliss had 2. Those five installations had 55% of the cases. Larger installations try more cases of every kind, and with counts this low, 1 case can change the order of the list.

Limits of a Small Group

With 29 cases, these figures describe a small number of trials, not a stable pattern. The records give trial dates, not offense dates. They cannot show which cases fell under the special trial counsel system that began on December 28, 2023, or under the sentencing parameters for offenses after December 27, 2023. The records also do not show the evidence, the plea terms, or anything resolved by nonjudicial punishment or administrative separation. Army records in this data are sparse before 2021.

Dates and sources for the law changes mentioned here: 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.