Army Article 92 Cases in 2021

Trends › By Offense › Article 92 › Army, 2021

Based on 87 cases · 2021 · Army records · data updated October 24, 2026

Punitive Discharges Were Less Common

For an enlisted member, a punitive discharge is a bad-conduct or dishonorable discharge. One was adjudged in 51% of enlisted convictions in these cases: 26 bad-conduct and 11 dishonorable. Across all Army cases in 2021, the share was 70%.

Of officers and warrant officers, 5 were convicted and 3 were dismissed. Dismissal is the officer equivalent of a punitive discharge. A sentence without a punitive discharge does not rule out a later administrative separation, which these records do not track.

More NCOs Than Junior Enlisted

The accused were 49 NCOs, 33 junior enlisted members, and 5 officers. This group was more senior than all Army cases in 2021.

General courts-martial heard 63 of the 87 cases (72%), about the same as the 73% across the Army. Special courts-martial heard the other 24. A special court-martial caps confinement at one year and cannot impose a dishonorable discharge.

Contested More Often Than Other Army Cases

Of the 87 accused, 48 pleaded guilty and 39 contested at least one charge. A case is contested when the accused pleads not guilty to at least one charge. The contested share was 45%, higher than the 36% for all Army cases in 2021.

Plea agreements are recorded for 44 of the 48 guilty pleas, and 4 have no entry. The records show whether an agreement existed, not what it contained.

Results in Contested Cases

Of the 39 decided contested cases, 26% ended in a full acquittal: not guilty of every charge. That was lower than the 35% for all Army cases in 2021.

Partial acquittals were more common: 22 cases ended not guilty of at least one charge or specification but guilty of another. Army results list findings charge by charge, so partial acquittals are common.

The accused usually chooses whether a military judge alone or a panel of members decides guilt. Members heard 21 of the 39 contested cases (54%). Members acquitted in full 19% of the time, and military judges 33% of the time. Because the accused chooses the forum in most cases, the two groups of cases are not alike. The difference does not show that one is more lenient than the other.

How Long Were the Sentences?

Of the 87 cases, 77 ended in a conviction on at least one charge, and 56 of those sentences included confinement (73%). The median confinement was 6 months, the same as the Army-wide median.

No confinement was more common here: 21 convictions (27%), compared with 19% Army-wide. Terms of more than one year were adjudged in 13 of 77 convictions (17%), compared with 26%. Terms between 1 and 5 years made up 9% here and 18% across the Army. Terms of 5 years or more were 8% in both groups.

These are adjudged sentences, announced at trial before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal. Each covers every charge in the case.

Sentences by Court Level

At general courts-martial, 79% of convictions included confinement, and the median was 8 months. At special courts-martial, 53% did, and the median was 2 months.

Only a general court-martial can adjudge more than one year of confinement. A special court-martial is capped at one year.

Orders Violations Were Rarely the Only Charge

Only 4 of the 87 cases charged Article 92 alone. Article 128 (assault) appeared in 29 cases, Article 134 (general article) in 28, Article 120 (sexual assault) in 25, Article 112a (drug) in 17, and Article 93 (maltreatment) in 12.

Each sentence covers all the convictions in the case. The outcomes above cannot be assigned to the orders violation alone.

Installations and Forum

Fort Bragg and Joint Base Lewis-McChord tried 10 of these cases each. Fort Hood tried 9, and Fort Drum and Fort Knox 5 each. Those five installations had 45% of the 87 cases. Larger installations try more cases of every kind.

Across all cases, 66 were decided by a judge alone, 19 by enlisted panels, and 2 by officer panels. Members heard 24% of the cases with a forum listed.

What the Records Do Not Show

Army records in this data are sparse before 2021, after the services were required to begin publishing trial records under Article 140a by December 2020. The records include only cases that reached a courtroom. Orders violations resolved through nonjudicial punishment, administrative separation, or no action are not included. The records also do not show the evidence or the plea terms.

For what the offense covers and how it is defended, see Article 92 on the law firm's website. Dates and sources for the law changes: 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.