Property Damage Plus Orders Violation: Courts-Martial Charging Articles 109 and 92
The records include 26 Army, Navy, and Marine Corps courts-martial from 2013–2026 that charged both Article 109 (property damage) and Article 92 (orders violation). The median confinement was 8 months, compared with 6 months in all Army, Navy, and Marine Corps cases charging Article 109.
Understanding Trends in Military Practice · 5 min read
Trends › By Offense › Article 109 › With Article 92
Short answer: The records include 26 Army, Navy, and Marine Corps courts-martial from 2013–2026 that charged both Article 109 (property damage) and Article 92 (orders violation). The median confinement was 8 months, compared with 6 months in all Army, Navy, and Marine Corps cases charging Article 109. The 13 general courts-martial had a median of 1.1 years, while the 13 special courts-martial had a median of 3 months.
General and Special Courts-Martial Compared
The cases split evenly by court level: 13 general courts-martial and 13 special courts-martial. In the general courts-martial, the median confinement was 1.1 years and 46% of cases were contested. In the special courts-martial, the median was 3 months and 20% were contested.
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 impose a dishonorable discharge. Since 2019, a special court-martial can also be tried by a military judge alone, capped at six months of confinement with no punitive discharge.
Overall Confinement
All 26 cases ended in a conviction on at least one charge. Of those 26 convictions, 24 carried confinement. The middle sentence was 8 months, longer than the 6 months for all Army, Navy, and Marine Corps cases charging Article 109.
Among the sentences that included confinement, a quarter were 1.2 years or longer. These are adjudged sentences, before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal. Each covers every charge in the case.
Sentence Bands Compared
7 of the 26 convictions (27%) carried more than one year of confinement, about the same as the 25% for all Army, Navy, and Marine Corps cases charging Article 109. Only a general court-martial can adjudge more than one year.
The largest band was under 6 months, with 12 convictions (46%), compared with 40% for all Article 109 cases. The band of 6 months to 1 year held 5 (19%), compared with 22%. The band of more than 1 year and under 5 years held 4 (15%), compared with 18%. 3 convictions (12%) carried 5 years or more, compared with 7%.
2 convictions (8%) carried no confinement, compared with 13%.
| Adjudged confinement | Convictions | Share here | Share, all Army, Navy, and Marine Corps cases charging Article 109 |
|---|---|---|---|
| No confinement | 2 | 8% | 13% |
| Under 6 months | 12 | 46% | 40% |
| 6 months to 1 year | 5 | 19% | 22% |
| More than 1 year, under 5 years | 4 | 15% | 18% |
| 5 years or more | 3 | 12% | 7% |
Assault and Domestic Violence Charges
Every case charged at least one article besides Article 109. After Article 92, the charges seen most often were Article 128 (assault) in 12 cases and Article 128b (domestic violence, numbered since 2019) in 11. Article 86 (AWOL) appeared in 6, and Article 115 (malingering before 2019; communicating threats since) in 5.
Pleas
23 of the 26 records list the plea. 15 accused pleaded guilty, and 8 contested at least one charge by pleading not guilty to it.
The contested share was 35%. In all Army, Navy, and Marine Corps cases charging Article 109, it was 31%.
Discharges
A punitive discharge followed 54% of enlisted convictions: 10 bad-conduct discharges and 4 dishonorable discharges. The share for all Army, Navy, and Marine Corps cases charging Article 109 was 57%. A sentence without a punitive discharge does not rule out a later administrative separation.
Rank and Location
Junior enlisted members (E-1 to E-4) made up 73% of the accused, and NCOs 27%. No officers appear. The junior enlisted share was the same, 73%, in all Army, Navy, and Marine Corps cases charging Article 109.
Fort Bragg had 3 cases. Joint Base Lewis-McChord, MCAS Cherry Point, North Carolina, Marine Corps Base Hawaii, Kaneohe Bay, and Vilseck (Europe) had 2 each. These five installations account for 42% of the 26 cases. Larger installations try more cases of every kind, so a high count alone does not show a problem at a base.
Trial Dates
The cases were tried from May 2013 through October 2026. There was 1 in 2013, 1 in 2015, 3 in 2018, 3 in 2020, 5 in 2021, 3 in 2022, 5 in 2023, 1 in 2024, and 4 in 2026. No cases were recorded in 2014, 2016, 2017, 2019, or 2025. The 2026 count is a partial year.
Law Changes and Record Limits
The Military Justice Act of 2016 took effect on January 1, 2019. It set fixed panel sizes, created judge-alone special courts-martial, and brought in written plea agreements. Since December 28, 2023, special trial counsel, not commanders, decide whether to prosecute covered offenses such as sexual assault, domestic violence, and murder, and when every guilty finding in a case is for an offense after December 27, 2023, the military judge sets the sentence within new sentencing parameters.
These rules depend on the offense date. The records give trial dates only, and they do not describe the evidence, the plea terms, or conduct handled by nonjudicial punishment or administrative separation.
Dates and sources for the law changes mentioned here: UCMJ change timeline.
How We Counted
Army, Navy, and Marine Corps courts-martial that charged both Article 109 and Article 92 (26 cases). Air Force cases are left out because Air Force records rarely list the charges in acquittals.
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 109 (Property Other Than Military; Waste, Spoilage, Destruction): Court-Martial Data and Trends (hub)
- Article 92 (Failure to Obey Order or Regulation): Court-Martial Data and Trends (hub)
- Property Damage Plus Assault: Courts-Martial Charging Articles 109 and 128
- Articles 109 and 128b in the Same Case: What the Records Show
- Property Damage Plus Larceny: Courts-Martial Charging Articles 109 and 121
- How Has Article 109 Changed in Army Courts-Martial Since 2021?
- Air Force Article 109 Cases by the Numbers, 2016–2025
- 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.