Army Article 92 Trials Before Members (A Panel): Verdicts and Sentences
Panels of members decided 48 contested Army cases charging Article 92 (orders violation) from 2021–2025. 13 ended in a full acquittal (27%), close to the 25% in all contested Army Article 92 cases, the comparison group used on this page.
Understanding Trends in Military Practice · 5 min read
Trends › By Offense › Article 92 › Decided by members
Short answer: Panels of members decided 48 contested Army cases charging Article 92 (orders violation) from 2021–2025. 13 ended in a full acquittal (27%), close to the 25% in all contested Army Article 92 cases, the comparison group used on this page. Sentences with confinement had a median of 6 months, shorter than the comparison group's 1 year.
Orders Violations Tried With Sexual Assault
Only 1 of the 48 cases charged Article 92 by itself. In the comparison group, the figure was 7 of 102. The added charge seen most often was Article 120 (sexual assault), in 26 cases. Next came Article 128 (assault) in 20, Article 134 (the general article) in 13, Article 93 (maltreatment) in 12, and Article 107 (false official statement) in 9.
A court-martial sentence covers all the charges in the case. With sexual assault charged in 26 of these cases, the sentences below are not sentences for an orders violation alone.
Results of the Contested Cases
All 48 cases were contested: 48 not-guilty or mixed pleas and no guilty pleas. 13 of the 48 contested cases that reached a verdict ended in a full acquittal (27%), close to the comparison group rate of 25%.
Partial acquittals made up 58%, or 28 cases. In each, the panel found the accused not guilty of at least one charge or specification and guilty of another. Because Army results record findings for each charge separately, this outcome appears often.
A Short Median With Some Long Sentences
35 cases ended in a conviction on at least one charge, and 26 of those sentences included confinement (74%). Their median confinement was 6 months, against a comparison group median of 1 year.
Some sentences were much longer. A quarter of the sentences with confinement were 5 years or longer. These are adjudged sentences, as announced at trial and before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal.
Where Convictions Fell by Band
Only 9 of 35 convictions (26%) included more than one year of confinement, below the comparison group share of 33%. Sentences of more than 1 year and under 5 years made up 6%, compared with 18%. Sentences of 5 years or more made up 20%, compared with 14%.
Short terms of confinement were more common. Sentences under 6 months made up 31%, compared with 25%, and sentences of 6 months to 1 year made up 17%, compared with 9%. 9 convictions carried no confinement (26%), compared with 33%.
| Adjudged confinement | Convictions | Share here | Share, all contested Army Article 92 cases |
|---|---|---|---|
| No confinement | 9 | 26% | 33% |
| Under 6 months | 11 | 31% | 25% |
| 6 months to 1 year | 6 | 17% | 9% |
| More than 1 year, under 5 years | 2 | 6% | 18% |
| 5 years or more | 7 | 20% | 14% |
Discharges After Conviction
Among 33 enlisted members convicted, 15 received a bad-conduct or dishonorable discharge (45%), matching the comparison group (45%). 10 of the 15 were dishonorable discharges.
Of 2 convicted officers or warrant officers, 1 was dismissed, the officer form of a punitive discharge. Even without a punitive discharge, an administrative separation can still follow later.
Panels, Rank, and Court Level
Enlisted panels decided 44 cases and officer panels decided 4. The accused usually chooses whether a military judge alone or a panel of members decides guilt, so cases tried each way are not alike. These figures describe panel trials and do not show what a panel causes.
By rank, the accused were 34 NCOs, 11 junior enlisted members, and 3 officers. That rank mix is similar to the comparison group. 40 cases were general courts-martial and 8 were special courts-martial. That general share, 83%, is higher than the 76% in the comparison group.
Years and Installations
The cases were tried from January 2021 through October 2025. The count was highest in 2021, with 21, followed by 11 in 2022, 7 in 2023, 6 in 2024, and 3 in 2025.
The installation with the most cases was Fort Bragg, with 8, ahead of Joint Base Lewis-McChord with 5, Fort Knox with 4, and Vilseck (Europe) and Fort Drum with 3 apiece. Together, these five held 48% of the 48 cases. Larger installations try more cases of every kind, so a count is not a measure of orders violations at any base.
Law Changes and Record Limits
The decision to prosecute covered offenses such as sexual assault, domestic violence, and murder has belonged to special trial counsel, not commanders, since December 28, 2023. A military judge sets the sentence within new sentencing parameters when every guilty finding is for an offense after December 27, 2023. Both rules depend on offense dates, which the records do not list.
The records cover courts-martial only, not nonjudicial punishment or administrative separation. They do not describe 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.
How We Counted
Army courts-martial with trial dates in 2021–2025 that charged Article 92, had a not-guilty or mixed plea and a result posted, and record members (a panel) as deciding guilt (48 cases), compared with all 102 such contested Army Article 92 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 92 (Failure to Obey Order or Regulation): Court-Martial Data and Trends (hub)
- Army Courts-Martial: Data and Trends (hub)
- Sentences (hub)
- Army Article 92 Trials Before a Military Judge Alone: 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 80 Trials Before Members (A Panel): Verdicts and Sentences
- Article 92 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.