> ## Content Index
> Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.bodiesburied.com/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further.

# What the Army Tried in June 2022
- URL: https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-courts-martial-june-2022/
- Published: 2026-10-28T08:11:10.000Z
- Updated: 2026-10-30T05:18:07.000Z
- Description: The Army tried 45 courts-martial in June 2022. The median confinement was 3 months, compared with 6 months for the Army across 2022. Of 14 contested cases that reached a verdict, 7 ended in a full acquittal (50%), compared with 38% for the year.
- Author: Jocelyn C. Stewart
- Tags: Understanding Trends, Army

[Trends](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/) › [By Year](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/by-year/) › June 2022

**Short answer:** The Army tried 45 courts-martial in June 2022\. The median confinement was 3 months, compared with 6 months for the Army across 2022\. Of 14 contested cases that reached a verdict, 7 ended in a full acquittal (50%), compared with 38% for the year.

Based on 45 cases · June 2022 · Army records · data updated October 24, 2026

## Short Confinement Terms

Of 38 convictions, 82% included confinement. Half the terms were 3 months or less. A quarter were 8 months or longer.

Sentences over one year were given in only 5 of 38 convictions (13%), compared with 27% for the Army in 2022\. Terms over 1 year and under 5 years were given in 3 convictions (8%), compared with 20%. Another 2 convictions (5%) carried 5 years or more. Most terms were shorter: 47% were under 6 months, compared with 41%, and 21% were between 6 months and 1 year, compared with 16%.

The median confinement was 7 months at general courts-martial (29 cases) and 2 months at special courts-martial (16 cases). A special court-martial cannot adjudge more than a year. These are adjudged sentences for every charge, before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal.

| Adjudged confinement            | Convictions | Share here | Share, the Army for all of 2022 |
| ------------------------------- | ----------- | ---------- | ------------------------------- |
| No confinement                  | 7           | 18%        | 16%                             |
| Under 6 months                  | 18          | 47%        | 41%                             |
| 6 months to 1 year              | 8           | 21%        | 16%                             |
| More than 1 year, under 5 years | 3           | 8%         | 20%                             |
| 5 years or more                 | 2           | 5%         | 7%                              |

## Full Acquittals in 7 of 14 Contested Cases

A case is contested when the accused pleads not guilty to at least one charge. Of 14 contested cases that reached a verdict, 7 ended in a full acquittal (50%). Another 5 ended in a partial acquittal: not guilty of at least one charge or specification and guilty of another.

The contested share was 41% at general courts-martial and 12% at special courts-martial. Army results list findings charge by charge, so partial acquittals are recorded in this data.

## Larceny and Conspiracy Charged More Often

All 45 records list charges. Each article counts once per case. Article 134 (general article) and Article 92 (failure to obey order or regulation) were the most common charges, at 22% each. For 2022, their shares were 21% and 18%.

Article 121 (larceny) was charged in 13% of cases, compared with 8% for the year. Article 81 (conspiracy) was charged in 11%, compared with 7%. Article 120 (rape and sexual assault) was charged less often: 18%, compared with 26%. Article 128 (assault) was also charged less often: 20%, compared with 27%.

| UCMJ Article                                                                                                                                       | Cases | Share here | Share, the Army for all of 2022 |
| -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ----- | ---------- | ------------------------------- |
| [Art. 134](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/practice-areas/court-martial/article-134/?ref=bodiesburied.com) General article                           | 10    | 22%        | 21%                             |
| [Art. 92](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/practice-areas/court-martial/article-92/?ref=bodiesburied.com) Failure to obey order or regulation         | 10    | 22%        | 18%                             |
| [Art. 128](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/practice-areas/court-martial/article-128/?ref=bodiesburied.com) Assault                                   | 9     | 20%        | 27%                             |
| [Art. 120](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/ucmj/article-120-sexual-assault/?ref=bodiesburied.com) Rape and sexual assault                            | 8     | 18%        | 26%                             |
| [Art. 112a](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/ucmj/article-112a-drug-offenses/?ref=bodiesburied.com) Wrongful use, possession of controlled substances | 7     | 16%        | 13%                             |
| [Art. 121](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/practice-areas/court-martial/article-121/?ref=bodiesburied.com) Larceny                                   | 6     | 13%        | 8%                              |
| Art. 81 Conspiracy                                                                                                                                 | 5     | 11%        | 7%                              |
| [Art. 107](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/practice-areas/court-martial/article-107/?ref=bodiesburied.com) False official statements                 | 4     | 9%         | 8%                              |

## Conviction and Sentence by Charge

Article 128 cases ended in a conviction on that article in 8 of 9 cases. The median confinement for those convictions was 3 months. Article 134 and Article 92 cases each ended in 8 convictions out of 10 cases (80%). Their median confinement terms were 4 months and 2 months.

Article 120 cases ended in a conviction in 4 of 8 cases. Those convictions had a median confinement of 2.5 years. Cases charging Article 92 ended in a guilty plea in 7 of 10 cases, and so did cases charging Article 134\. The records do not explain plea decisions. The rows overlap when a case charges several articles.

| Article                                     | Cases charging it | Convicted of it (share) | Median confinement when convicted of it |
| ------------------------------------------- | ----------------- | ----------------------- | --------------------------------------- |
| Art. 134 General article                    | 10                | 8 (80%)                 | 4 months                                |
| Art. 92 Failure to obey order or regulation | 10                | 8 (80%)                 | 2 months                                |
| Art. 128 Assault                            | 9                 | 8 (8 of 9)              | 3 months                                |
| Art. 120 Rape and sexual assault            | 8                 | 4 (4 of 8)              | 2.5 years                               |

## Pleas Recorded

The month had 31 guilty pleas and 14 not-guilty or mixed pleas. The contested share was 31%, compared with 36% for the year. Of the 31 guilty pleas, 28 are recorded with a plea agreement and 3 have no entry. Army records do not show what any agreement said.

## Discharges and a More Senior Group

Of 36 convicted enlisted members, 26 received a punitive discharge: 21 bad-conduct discharges and 5 dishonorable discharges. The Army share for 2022 was 76%. Of 2 convicted officers or warrant officers, 1 was dismissed. A sentence without a punitive discharge does not rule out administrative separation later.

The accused were 22 junior enlisted members (E-1 to E-4), 21 NCOs (E-5 to E-9), and 2 officers or warrant officers. This group was more senior than the Army in 2022, where 57% were junior enlisted. General courts-martial made up 29 of 45 cases (64%), compared with 74% for the year.

## Who Decided Guilt

Of cases with a forum listed, members decided 20%: 8 enlisted panels and 1 officer panel. A military judge alone decided the other 35\. Among contested cases, members heard 8 of 13 (62%). The accused usually chooses the forum, and most guilty pleas are heard by a judge alone.

## Compared With June 2021

June 2021 had 57 cases. June 2022 had 45\. The median confinement was 3 months, compared with 5 months in June 2021\. The contested share was 31%, compared with 39%. Full acquittals in contested cases that reached a verdict were 7 of 14, compared with 5 of 22.

Punitive discharges for convicted enlisted members were more common: 72%, compared with 54%. The general court-martial share was lower: 64%, compared with 74%. Monthly groups are small and a few cases can change them, so these comparisons show direction only.

|                                     | June 2021 | June 2022 |
| ----------------------------------- | --------- | --------- |
| Cases                               | 57        | 45        |
| Contested (of pleas recorded)       | 39%       | 31%       |
| Full acquittals (decided contested) | 5 of 22   | 7 of 14   |
| Convictions with confinement        | 83%       | 82%       |
| Median confinement                  | 5 months  | 3 months  |
| Punitive discharge (enlisted)       | 54%       | 72%       |
| General courts-martial              | 74%       | 64%       |

## Installations and Limits

Fort Bragg tried 8 cases, Fort Hood 5, Fort Knox and Joint Base Lewis-McChord 4 each, and Camp Humphreys 3\. Together these installations account for 53% of the month. Larger installations try more cases overall.

The records cover cases that reached a courtroom. They do not include nonjudicial punishment, administrative separations, offense dates, the evidence, or plea terms.

Dates and sources for the law changes mentioned here: [UCMJ change timeline](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/ucmj-change-timeline/).

### How We Counted

Army courts-martial with a trial date in June 2022 (45 cases), compared with the whole year.

Source: public court-martial records (Article 140a, UCMJ) in [Military Trial Results](https://www.bodiesburied.com/military-trial-results/), data updated October 24, 2026\. Definitions, sources, and known gaps: [how this data was built](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/how-the-military-trial-results-data-was-built/). Errors: content@bodiesburied.com.

## Related Analysis

- [Army Courts-Martial: Data and Trends](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-courts-martial/) (hub)
- [By Year](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/by-year/) (hub)
- [May 2022 at Army Courts-Martial: 62 Cases](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-courts-martial-may-2022/) (previous / next)
- [What the Army Tried in July 2022](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-courts-martial-july-2022/) (previous / next)
- [The Army Court-Martial Year, 2022](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-courts-martial-2022-year-in-review/) (the whole year)
- [April 2023 at Army Courts-Martial: 49 Cases](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-courts-martial-april-2023/)
- [April 2024 at Army Courts-Martial: 46 Cases](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-courts-martial-april-2024/)
- [Army Courts-Martial, August 2025: The Month in Review](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-courts-martial-august-2025/)
- [Army Courts-Martial, December 2024: The Month in Review](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-courts-martial-december-2024/)
- [Search every case in Military Trial Results](https://www.bodiesburied.com/military-trial-results/) (members)

← Previous: [May 2022 at Army Courts-Martial: 62 Cases](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-courts-martial-may-2022/)Next: [What the Army Tried in July 2022](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-courts-martial-july-2022/) →

**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](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/?ref=bodiesburied.com). This analysis is for education and information only. It is not legal advice, and every case is different.