Contested Army Article 90 Cases Decided by Members (A Panel)
Members decided guilt in 23 contested Army cases charging Article 90 (disobeying an officer) from 2021–2025. Full acquittals came in 9% of them, lower than the 13% in all contested Army Article 90 cases.
Understanding Trends in Military Practice · 5 min read
Trends › By Offense › Article 90 › Decided by members
Short answer: Members decided guilt in 23 contested Army cases charging Article 90 (disobeying an officer) from 2021–2025. Full acquittals came in 9% of them, lower than the 13% in all contested Army Article 90 cases. 21 cases ended in a conviction, and 11 of 19 convicted enlisted members received a punitive discharge (58%), compared with 67% in all contested Army Article 90 cases.
Most Cases Ended in a Conviction
21 of the 23 cases ended in a conviction on at least one charge. All 23 were contested, meaning the accused pleaded not guilty to at least one charge, and none pleaded guilty. Full acquittals came in 9% of the 23 contested cases that reached a verdict, lower than the 13% in all contested Army Article 90 cases.
18 cases ended in a partial acquittal: not guilty of at least one charge or specification, guilty of another. Army results list findings charge by charge, which is why partial acquittals are common in Army records.
Disobedience Was Never Charged Alone
Every one of the 23 cases charged at least one other article with Article 90. Article 128 (assault) was the most common, in 16 cases. Article 120 (sexual assault) appeared in 12, Article 134 (the general article) in 10, Article 92 (orders violation) in 5, and Article 107 (false official statement) in 4.
A court-martial sentence covers all the charges together. The confinement and discharge figures below therefore describe whole cases that often included assault or sexual assault charges.
Confinement in Most Sentences
Confinement was part of 90% of the 21 convictions. The median confinement was 1.6 years, the same as the 1.6-year median in all contested Army Article 90 cases. A quarter of those sentences were 5 years or longer.
These are adjudged sentences, before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal.
Sentence Lengths by Band
12 of 21 convictions (57%) included more than one year of confinement, about the same as the 55% in all contested Army Article 90 cases. Sentences of 5 years or more made up 24%, compared with 21%. Sentences of more than 1 year and under 5 years made up 33% in both groups.
Sentences under 6 months made up 24%, compared with 18%. 2 convictions carried no confinement (10%), compared with 15%.
| Adjudged confinement | Convictions | Share here | Share, all contested Army Article 90 cases |
|---|---|---|---|
| No confinement | 2 | 10% | 15% |
| Under 6 months | 5 | 24% | 18% |
| 6 months to 1 year | 2 | 10% | 12% |
| More than 1 year, under 5 years | 7 | 33% | 33% |
| 5 years or more | 5 | 24% | 21% |
Punitive Discharges
Among 19 enlisted members convicted, 11 received a bad-conduct or dishonorable discharge (58%), less often than in all contested Army Article 90 cases (67%). 10 of the 11 were dishonorable discharges.
2 convicted officers or warrant officers appear here, and both were dismissed. A sentence without a punitive discharge does not rule out a later administrative separation.
Who Was Tried and at Which Court Level
14 of the accused were NCOs (E-5 to E-9), 7 were junior enlisted members (E-1 to E-4), and 2 were officers or warrant officers. The group is more senior than all contested Army Article 90 cases, where 39% of the accused were junior enlisted.
17 of the 23 cases were general courts-martial (74%), compared with 82% in all contested Army Article 90 cases. A special court-martial caps confinement at one year and cannot impose a dishonorable discharge.
Panels and the Choice of Forum
Enlisted panels decided 20 of the cases, and officer panels decided 3. The accused usually chooses whether a military judge alone or a panel of members decides guilt, so panel cases and judge-alone cases are not alike. The figures here describe what happened in panel trials, not what a panel causes.
Years and Installations
The cases were tried between March 2021 and December 2025: 7 in 2021, 5 in 2022, 8 in 2023, 2 in 2024, and 1 in 2025. Wheeler Army Airfield had 4 cases, Fort Irwin and Fort Bragg 3 each, and Kaiserslautern (Europe) and Fort Riley 2 each. Those five installations account for 61% of the 23 cases. The most cases in one year came in 2023. Larger installations try more cases of every kind, so a count at one base is not a measure of disobedience there.
Rules and Records
Since December 28, 2023, special trial counsel, not commanders, decide whether to prosecute covered offenses such as sexual assault, domestic violence, and murder. When every guilty finding is for an offense after December 27, 2023, the military judge sets the sentence within new sentencing parameters. These records give trial dates, not offense dates, so the trials held in 2024 and 2025 may include cases under either set of rules, and the data cannot show whether the changes affected any result.
Disobedience handled by nonjudicial punishment or administrative separation is not in 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 90 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 90, had a not-guilty or mixed plea and a result posted, and record members (a panel) as deciding guilt (23 cases), compared with all 38 such contested Army Article 90 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 90 (Willfully Disobeying Superior Officer): Court-Martial Data and Trends (hub)
- Army Courts-Martial: Data and Trends (hub)
- Sentences (hub)
- 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 80 Trials Before Members (A Panel): Verdicts and Sentences
- Army Article 80 Trials Before a Military Judge Alone: Verdicts and Sentences
- Article 90 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.